TEMA 1: AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSLATION THEORY

2. THE CONCEPT OF TRANSLATIONS Focus on written translation rather than oral translation (the latter is commonly known as interpreting or interpretation). The term tran !ation refers to the general subject field, the product or the process (also known as tran !ating). The pro"e o# tran !ation between two different written languages (the o$r"e te%t or ST) in the original verbal language (the o$r"e !ang$age or SL) into a written text (the target te%t or TT) in a different verbal language (the target !ang$age or TL). akobson!s categories" 2.1.1. Intra!ing$a! translation, or #rewording$" interpretation of verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language. 2.1.2. Inter!ing$a! translation, or #translation proper$" an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other languages. 2.1.&. Inter e'ioti" translation, or #transmutation$" an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of non%verbal sign systems. &ntralingual translation occur when we rephrase an expression or when we summari'e or otherwise rewrite a text in the same language. &ntersemiotic translation would occur if a written text were translated, for example, into music, film or painting. &t is interlingual translation between two different verbal languages. That translation can be considered as a protot(pe classification. (aria Tymoc'ko" "on"ept$a! orientation and where the goal of close lexical fidelity to an original may not therefore be shared, certainly in the practice of translation of sacred and literary text. 2. )HAT IS TRANSLATION STUDIES* The study of translation as an academic subject has only really begun in the past )* years in the +nglish speaking world, this discipline is now generally known as #translation studios$. The demand that translation studies should be viewed as an independent discipline, has come from several -uarters in recent years. There are two very visible ways in which translation studies has become more prominent. First, proliferation of pe"ia!i+e, tran !ation an, interpreting "o$r e at both undergraduate and postgraduate level. These courses are orientated towards training future professional commercial translators and interpreters and serve as highly valued entry%level -ualifications for the translating and interpreting professions. .ther courses, in smaller numbers, focus on the practice of literary translation. (ajor courses at (iddlesex university and /niversity of +ast 0nglia, the latter of which also houses the 1ritish 2entre for 3iterary Translation. &n +urope, there is now a network of centres where literary translation is studied, practiced and promoted. .thers" 0rles (France), Tarragona (4pain). 5roliferation of "on#eren"e - .oo/ an, 0o$rna! on translation in many languages. +xample" Translation and literature (/6), Hermeneus (4pain). .nline publications" the entire contents of Meta, issues of Babel and Target. There are various professional publications dedicated to the practice of translation. &n the /6 these include the Linguist of the 2hartered &nstitute of 3inguists, and In other words, the literary%oriented publication of the Translators 0ssociation. 0lso Internationa! organi+ation have prospered. A 1RIEF HISTORY OF THE DISCIPLINE The practice of translation was discussed by 2icero and 7orace. &n 4t erome!s case, his approach to translating the 8reek 4eptuagint into 3atin would affect later translations of the 4criptures. &n western +urope the translation of the bible was to be the battleground of conflicting ideologies. &n 2hina, it was the translation of the 1uddhist sutras . although the practice of translating is long established, the study of the field developed into an academic discipline only in the second half of the 9* th century. 1efore that, translation had normally been merely an element of language learning in modern language courses. Translation exercises were regarded as a means of learning a new language or of reading a foreign language text until one had the linguistic ability to read the original. 0s far as teaching was concerned, translation then tended to become restricted to higher%level and university language courses and professional translator training, to the extent that present first%year undergraduates in the /6 are unlikely to have had any real practice in the skill. &n the /40, translation was promoted in universities in the :;)*s by the tran !ation 2or/ 3op. <unning parallel to his approach was that of "o'parati4e !iterat$re, where literature is studied and compared transitionally and transculturally, necessitating the reading of some literature in translation. 0nother area is "ontra ti4e ana!( i . &t!s the study of two languages in contrast in an attempt to identify general and specific differences between them. The contrastive approach heavily influenced other studies, such as =inay and >abelnet!s and 2atford!s, which overtly stated the aim of assisting translation research. 2ontrastive does not The #theoretical$ branch is divided into general and partial theories. The branch of #pure$ research is ,e "ripti4e, incorporate 4ociocultural and pragmatic factors. 0lthough sometimes denigrated, the continued application of a linguistic approach in general, and specific linguistic models such as generative and has ? possible foci" grammar or functional grammar, has demonstrated an inherent and gut link with translation. This more #scientific$ approach in may ways began to mark out the territory of the academic orientate, DTS 7,e "ripti4e tran !ation t3eor(8 examine existing translations. 3arger%scale investigation of translation. The word #science$ was used by nida Pro,$"t in the title Towards the Science of translating. studies can be either diachronic or synchronic. 1y #$n"tion9orientate, DTS description of the function of translations. 4ocio%translation studies or THE HOLMES6TOURY MAP 2rucially, 7olmes puts forward an overall framework, describing what translation studies covers. This framework has subse-uently been presented by the leading cultural%studies%oriented translation. &sraeli translation scholar Toury. The results of >T4 research have the following subdivisions" Me,i$'9re tri"te, t3eorie translation by machine and humans, with further subdivisions whether the machine@computer is working alone or as an aid to the human translator, to whether the human translation is written or spoken and to whether spoken translation (interpreting). Area9re tri"te, t3eorie 4pecific languages or group of languages and@or cultures. Ran/9re tri"te, t3eorie linguistic theories that have been restricted to a specific%level of (normally) the word or sentence. Te%t9t(pe re tri"te, t3eorie look at specific discourse types or genres, eg. 3iterary, business and technical translation. The term ti'e9re tri"te, referring to theories and translations limited according to specific time frames and periods. The history of translation falls into this category. Pro.!e'9re tri"te, t3eorie 4pecific problems such as e-uivalence (key issue in the )*s%A*s) or to a wider -uestion of whether universals of translated language exist. 0pplied branch" Tran !ator training teaching methods, testing techni-ues, curriculum design. Tran !ation ai, such as dictionaries, grammars and information technology. Tran !ation "riti"i ' evaluation of translations, including the marking of student translations and the reviews of published translations. 7olmes mentions also tran !ation po!i"( where he sees the translation scholar advising on the place of translation in society, including what place, if any, should occupy in the language teaching and learning curriculum.

&.

5.

7olmes devoted two%thirds of his attention to the Bpure! aspects of theory and description surely indicates his research interests rather than a lack of possibilities for the applied side. BTranslation policy! would nowadays far more likely be related to the ideology, including language policy and hegemony, that determines translation than was the case in 7olmes!s description. The different restrictions might well include a discourse%type as well as a text%type restriction. &nclusion of interpreting as a sub%category of human translation would also be disputed by many scholars. &n view of the very different re-uirements and activities associated with interpreting, and notwithstanding inevitable points of overlap, it would probably be best to consider interpreting as a parallel field, under the title of Binterpreting studies!. 7olmes!s map omits any mention of the individuality of the style, decision%making processes and working practices of human translators involved in the translation process. Cet it was precisely the split between theory and practice that 7olmes, himself both a literary translator and a researcher, sought to overcome. 0s interest in translation studies grew, the manifestations and effects of such a split became more evident and are clearly expressed by 6itty van 3euven%Dwart. 4he describes translation teachers! fear that theory would take over from practical training, and literary translators! views that translation was an art that could not be theori'ed, an opinion that is still manifested in much of their writing. .n the other hand, academic researchers from longer%established disciplines were Bvery sceptical! about translation research or felt that translation already had its place in the languages curriculum. :. DE;ELOPMENTS SINCE THE 1<=> The surge in translation studies since the :;A*s has seen different areas of 7olmes!s map come to the fore. 2ontrastive analysis has fallen by the wayside. The linguistics%oriented Bscience! of translation has continued strongly in 8ermany, but the concept of e-uivalence associated with it has been -uestioned and reconceived. 8ermany has seen the rise of theories centred around text types and text purpose while the 7allidayan influence of discourse analysis and systemic functional grammar, which views language as a communicative act in a 4ociocultural context, came to prominence in the early :;;*s, especially in 0ustralia and the /6, and was applied to translation in a series of works by scholars such as 1ell, 1aker, (ason. The late :;A*s and the :;E*s also saw the rise of a descriptive approach that had its origins in comparative literature and <ussian Formalism. 0 pioneering centre has been Tel 0viv. The idea of the literary polusystem in different literatures and genres, including translated and non%translated works, complete for dominance. The polysystemists worked with a 1elgium%based group. This dynamic, culturally oriented approach held sway for much of the following decade, and linguistics looked very staid. The :;;*s saw the incorporation of new schools and concepts, with 2anadian%based translation and gender research led by 4herry 4imon, the 1ra'ilian cannibalist school promoted by +lse =ieira, postcolonial translation theory, with the prominent figures of the 1engali scholars Tejaswini Firanjana and 8ayatri 4pivak and, in the /40, the cultural studies%oriented analysis of 3awrence =enuti, calling for greater visibility and recognition of the translator. This has continued apace in the first decade of the new millennium, with special interest devoted to translation, globali'ation and resistance, the sociology and historiography of translation and the interest in new technologies that have given rise to audiovisual translation, locali'ation and corpus%based translation studies. 0 notable characteristic has been the inter,i "ip!inarit( of recent research. 0n interdiscipline therefore challenges the current conventional way of thinking by promoting and responding to new links between different types of knowledge and technologies. the relationship of translation studies to other disciplines is not fixedG this explains the changes over the years, from a strong link to contrastive linguistics in the :;)*s. that translation studies has in some places been coloni'ed by language departments driven by the perceived attractiveness of academic teaching programmes centred on the practice of translation and with their own academic prejudices. &ronically, this has also exacerbated the artificial gap between practice and theory. For example, the research assessment exercise in the /6 still values academic articles higher than translations, even translations of whole books, notwithstanding the fact that the practice of translation is an invaluable, not to say essential, experience for the translation theorist and trainer. The most fascinating developments of the last few years have been the continued emergence of new perspectives, each seeking to establish a new Bparadigm! in translation studies. This has provoked debate, in subse-uent issues of Target, as to what Bshared ground! there actually is in this potentially fragmenting subject area. there has been Ba movement away from a prescriptive approach to translation to studying what translation actually looks like. Hithin this framework the choice of theory and methodology becomes important.! 4uch choice is crucial and it depends on the goals of the research and the researchers. methodology has evolved and become more sophisticated, but at the same time there is considerable divergence on methodology, as translation studies has moved from the study of words to text to 4ociocultural context to the workings, practices and Bhabitus! of the translators themselves. +ven the object of study, therefore, has shifted over time, from translation as primarily connected to language teaching and learning to the specific study of what happens in and around translation, translating and now translators.

TEMA 2: CONTRASTI;E FEATURES EN?LISH9SPANISH OF NON9SPECIALI@ED TEATS

1. INTRODUCTION every respectable profession (or every profession which wants to be recogni'ed as such) attempts to provide its members with systematic training in the field. =ocational training and academic training. =ocational courses provide training in practical skills but do not include a strong theoretical component. 0n academic course always includes a strong theoretical component. The value is that it encourages students to reflect on what they do, how they do it, and why they do it in one way rather than another. 0 doctor cannot decide whether it is better to follow one course of treatment rather than another without understanding such things as how the human body works. Theoretical training does not necessarily guarantee in all instances. Throughout its long history, translation has never really enjoyed the kind of recognition and respect that other professions such as medicine and engineering enjoy. Translators have constantly complained that translation is underestimated as a profession. This is not just the fault of the general public. The translation community itself is guilty of underestimating not so much the value as the complexity of the translation process and hence the need for formal professional training in the field. Translators are not yet sure #whether translation is a trade, an art, a profession or a business. Talented translators who have had no systematic formal training in translation but who have nevertheless achieved a high level of competence through long and varied experience tend to think that the translation community as a whole can achieve their own high standards in the same way. .ur profession is based on knowledge and experience. &t has the longest apprenticeship of any profession. Fot until thirty do you start to be useful as a translator, not until fifty do you start to be in your prime. The first stage ( t3e apprenti"e 3ip tage) is the time we devote to investing in ourselves by ac-uiring knowledge and experience of life. The -uestion is whether it is feasible for most aspiring translators and whether this approach is right for the profession as a whole. .ne obvious problem with this career path is that it takes so long to ac-uire the necessary skills you need as a translator that you career is almost over before it begins. 3anna 2astellano is not opposed to formal academic training" professional translators who actually argue strongly against formal academic training because, they suggest, translation is an art which re-uires aptitude, practice, and general knowledge. The ability to translate is a gift, they say" you either have it or you do not, and theory is therefore irrelevant to the work of a translator. He accept this line of thinking we will never be seen as anything but witch doctors and faith healers. (ost translator prefer to think of their work as a profession and would like to see others treat them as professionals rather than as skilled or semi%skilled workers. To achieve this, translators need to develop an ability to stand back and reflect on what they do and how they do it. Translation is a very young discipline in academic terms. &t is only just starting to feature as a subject of study in its own right. &t needs to draw on the findings and theories of other related disciplines in order to develop and formali'e its own methods. 0lmost every aspect of life in general and of the interaction between speech communities in particular can be considered relevant to translation, a discipline which has to concern itself with how meaning is generated within and between various groups of people in various cultural settings. &f translation is ever to become a profession in the full sense of the word, translators will need something other than the current mixture of intuition and practice to enable them to reflect on a sound knowledge of the raw material with which they work. To understand what language is and how it comes to function for its users. 3inguistics is a discipline which studies language both in its own right and as a tool for generating meanings. &t can certainly offer translators valuable insights into the nature and function of language. This is particularly true of modern linguistics. 4ub%disciplines as textlinguistics and pragmatics. 1.1. EAAMPLES- 1ACB9TRANSLATIONS AND THE LAN?UA?ES OF ILLUSTRATION The source language of most examples is +nglish. +nglish is probably the most widely translated language in the world. The direction of translation is therefore assumed to be from +nglish into a variety of target languages. 1a"/9tran !ation involves taking a text (original or translated) which is written in a language with which the reader is assumed to be unfamiliar, and translating it as literally as possible into +nglish. The term back%translation is used because since the source language is from which it was originally translated. 2. ECUI;ALENCE AT )ORD LE;EL +ach language articulates or organi'es the word differently. 3anguages do not simple name existing categories, they articulate their own. 2.1. T3e 2or, in ,i##erent !ang$age 2.1.1. )3at i a 2or,* The smallest unit which we would expect to possess individual meaning is the 2or,. For our present purposes, we can define the 2ritten 2or, with more precision as any se-uence of letters with an orthographic space on either side. (eaning can be carried by units smaller than the word. (ore often, it is carried by units much more complex than the single word and by various structures and linguistic devices. 2.1.2. I t3ere a one9to9one re!ation 3ip .et2een 2or, an, 'eaning* &n rebuilt there are two distinct elements of meaning" re and built I to built again. =erb type in 4panish I pasar a m uina. There is no one%to%one correspondence between orthographic words and elements of meaning within or across languages. 2.1.&. Intro,$"ing 'orp3e'e 'orp3e'e to describe the minimal formal element of meaning in language. >ifference between morphemes and words is that a morpheme cannot contain more than one element of meaning and cannot be further analysed. Inconceivable consists of three morphemes" in, meaning Bnot!, conceive meaning Bthink of or imagine!, and able meaning Bable to be, fit to be!. 4ome morphemes have grammatical functions such as marking plurality ( funds!"gender (manageress) and tense (considered). .thers change the class of the word, from verb to adjective (like" likeable), or add a specific element of meaning such as negation to it ( unhappy!. 4ome words consist of one morpheme" need, fast. (orphemes do not always have such clearly defined boundaries. He can identify two distinct morphemes in girls" girl # s, but we cannot do the same with men. 0n orthographic word may therefore contain more than one formal element of meaning, but the boundaries of such elements are not always clearly marked on the surface. 2.2. Le%i"a! 'eaning every word (lexical unit) has . . . something that is individual, that makes it different from any other word. The !e%i"a! 'eaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific value it has in a particular linguistic system and the Bpersonality! it ac-uires through usage within that system. This model is largely derived from 2ruse. 0ccording to 2ruse, we can distinguish four main types of meaning in words and utterances" propo itiona! 'eaning- e%pre i4e 'eaning- pre $ppo e, 'eaning- and e4o/e, 'eaning. 2.2.1. Propo itiona! 4 . e%pre i4e 'eaning The propo itiona! 'eaning arises from the relation between it and what it refers to or describes in a real or imagery world. He can judge an utterance as true or false. E%pre i4e 'eaning cannot be judged as true or false. <elates to the speaker!s feeling or attitude rather than to what words and utterances refer to. $on%t complaint and $on%t whinge. The speaker finds the action annoying. Two or more words or utterances can therefore have the same propositional meaning but differ in their expressive meanings. The difference between famous in +nglish and fameu& in French does not lie in their respective propositional meaningsG both items basically mean Bwell%known!. &t lies in their expressive meanings. 'amous is neutral in +nglish. 'ameu& is potentially evaluative and can be readily used in some context in a derogatory way (example" femme fameuse I # a woman of ill repute$). >ifferences between words in the area of expressive meaning are not simply a matter of whether an expression of a certain attitude or evaluation is inherently present or absent in the words in -uestion. 1oth un(ind and cruel, for instance, are inherently expressive, showing the speaker!s disapproval of someone!s attitude. 7owever, the element of disapproval in cruel is stronger than it is in un(ind. The meaning of a word or lexical unit can be both propositional and expressive. e.g. bloody and various other swear words and emphasi'ers. #as well as a simply masterful performance#. There are many highly expressive items in the above extract, but the word Simply in the last sentence has a totally expressive function. <emoving it would not alter the information content of the message but would, of course, tone its forcefulness down considerably. 2.2.2. Pre $ppo e, 'eaning 5resupposed meaning arises from co%occurrence restrictions, i.e. restrictionson what other words or expressions we expect to see before or after a particular lexical unit. These restrictions are of two types"

Se!e"tiona! re tri"tion these are a function of the propositional meaning of a word. He expect a human subject for the adjective 4tudious and an inanimate one for geometrical. 4electional restrictions are deliberately violated in the case of figurative language but are otherwise strictly observed Co!!o"ationa! re tri"tion >o not follow logically from the propositional meaning of a word. &n +nglish, teeth are brushed, but in 8erman and &talian they are #polished$. 2ollocational restrictions tend to show more variation across languages than do selectional restrictions. The difference between selectional and collocational restrictions is not always as clear cut as the examples given. The awkwardness of the wording can be explained interms of selectional or collocational restrictions, depending on whether or not one sees the restriction involved as a function of the prepositional meaning of emanate. 2.2.&. E4o/e, 'eaning &t arises from ,ia!e"t and regi ter variation. 0 ,ia!e"t is a variety of language which has currency within a specific community orgroup of speakers. &t may be classified on one of the following bases" % 8eographical (4cottish dialect, or 0merican) % Temporal (different periods, within a community) % 4ocial (different social classes) Regi ter is a variety language that a language user considers appropriate to a specific situation. <egister variation arises from variations in the following" % Fie!, o# ,i "o$r e: >ifferent linguistic choices are made by different speakers depending on what kind of action other than the immediate action of speaking they see themselves as participating in. For example, making love or discussing loveG making a political speech or discussing politicsG % Tenor o# ,i "o$r e: relationships between the people taking part in the discourse. (other@child, doctor@patient, superior@inferior. 8etting the tenor of discourse right in translation can be -uite difficult. For example" an 0merican teenager may adopt a highly informal tenor with his@her parents by using their first names instead of Mum)Mother. This level of informality would be highly inappropriate in most other cultures. 0 translator has to choose between changing the tenor to suit the expectations of the target reader and transferring the informal tenor to give a flavour of the type of relationship that teenagers have with their parents in 0merican society. % Mo,e o# ,i "o$r e: 0n abstract term for the role that the language is playing (speech, essay) and for its medium of transmission (spoken, written). >ifferent groups within each culture have different expectations about what kind of language is appropriate to particular situations. 0 translator must ensure that his@her product does not meet with a similar reaction. 4@he must ensure that the translation matches the register expectations of its prospective receivers, unless, of course, the purpose of the translation is to give a flavour of the source culture. Types of lexical meaning, the only one which relates to the truth or falsehood of an utterance is propositional meaning. The nature of language is such as that words have #blurred edges$" their meanings are, to a large extent, negotiable and are only reali'ed is specific context. one of the most difficult tasks that a translator is constantly faced with is that, notwithstanding the Bfu''iness! inherent in language, s@he must attempt to perceive the meanings of words and utterances very precisely in order to render them into another language. 2.&. T3e pro.!e' o# non9eD$i4a!en"e The choice of a suitable e-uivalent in a given context depends on a wide variety of factors. 4ome may be strictly linguistic. .ther factors may be extra% linguistic. &t is virtually impossible to offer absolute guidelines for dealing with the various types of non%e-uivalence which exist among languages. The choice of a suitable e-uivalent will always depend not only on the linguistic system or systems being handled by the translator, but also on the way both the writer of the source text and the producer of the target text, i.e. the translator, choose to manipulate the linguistic systems in -uestion. 2.&.1. Se'anti" #ie!, an, !e%i"a! et E t3e eg'entation o# e%perien"e The words of a language often reflect not so much the reality of the world, but the interests of the people who speak it. Se'anti" #ie!, . 0n example" he field of 45++27, or 530FT4, or =+7&23+4. 0 large number of semantic fields are common to all or most languages. (ost, if not all, languages will have fields of >&4T0F2+, 4&D+, 4705+, T&(+, +(.T&.F, 1+3&+F4, 020>+(&24/1 +2T4, and F0T/<03 57+F.(+F0. Le%i"a! et . +ach semantic field will normally have several sub% divisions or lexical sets under it. The field of 45++27 in +nglish has a sub%division of =+<14 .F 45++27 which includes general verbs such as speak and say and more specific ones such as mumble"murmur, mutter" and whisper .The more detailed a semantic field is in a given language, the more different it is likely to be from related semantic fields in other languages. (ost languages are likely to have e-uivalents for the more general verbs of speech such as say and speak, but many may not have e-uivalents for the more specific ones. 3anguages understandably tend to make only those distinctions in meaning which are relevant to their particular environment. The idea of semantic fields is inapplicable and is an over%simplification of the way language actually works. Hords like *ust" nevertheless and only cannot be easely filed under any particular semantic field. The idea of semantic fields works well enough for words and expressions which have fairly well%defined propositional meanings, but not for all. Two main areas in which an understanding of semantic fields and lexical sets can be useful to a translator" % 0ppreciating the #value$ that a word has in a given system. /nderstanding the difference in the structure of semantic fields in the source and target languages allows a translator to asses the value of a given item in a lexical set. +xample" 0ppreciating the #value$ that a word has in a given system. /nderstanding the difference in the structure of semantic fields in the source and target languages allows a translator to assess the value of a given item in a lexical set. +xample" &n the field of T+(5+<0T/<+, +nglish has four main divisions" cold, cool,hot and warm. This contrasts with (odern 0rabic, which has four different divisions" baarid (Bcold@cool!), haar (Bhot" of the weather!), saakhin (Bhot"of objects!), and daafi ! (Bwarm!). Fote that, in contrast with +nglish, 0rabic(a) does not distinguish between cold and cool, and (b) distinguishes between the hotness of the weather and the hotness of other things. >eveloping strategies for dealing with non%e-uivalence. % >eveloping strategies for dealing with non%e-uivalence. 4emantic fields are arranged hierarchically, going from the more general o the more specific. The general word is usually referred to as $peror,inate and the specific word as 3(pon('. &n the field of =+7&23+4, vehicle is a superordinate and bus, car, truck, coach, etc. are all hyponyms of vehicle. Translators often deal with semantic gaps by modifying a superordinate word or by means of circumlocutions based on modifying superordinates. .ne important thing to bear in mind when dealing with semantic fields is that they are not fixed. 4emantic fields are always changing. 2.&.2. Non9eD$i4a!en"e at 2or, !e4e! an, o'e "o''on trategie #or ,ea!ing 2it3 it Fon%e-uivalence at word level means that the target language has no direct e-uivalent for a word which occurs in the source text. The type and level of difficulty posed can vary tremendously depending on the nature of non%e-uivalence. >ifferent kinds of non%e-uivalence re-uire different strategies. The context and purpose of translation will often rule out some strategies and favour others. 2.&.2.1.Co''on pro.!e' o# non9eD$i4a!en"e 2ulture%specific concepts The source%language word may express a concept which is totally unknown in the target culture. (ay be abstract or concrete. &t may be relate to a religious belief, a social custom, or even a type of food. 2ulture%specific" privacy. This is a very +nglish concept which is rarely understood by people from other cultures. The source%language concept is not lexicali'ed in the target language The source%language word may express a concept which is known in the target culture but simply not lexicali'ed. The word savoury has no e-uivalent in many languages, although it expresses a concept which is easy to understand. The adjective standard (meaning #ordinary, not extra$)also expresses a concept which is very accessible and readily understood by most people, yet 0rabic has not e-uivalent for it.

The source%language word is semantically complex 2ommon problem in translation. Hords do not have to be morphologically complex to be semantically complex. 0 single word which consists of a single morpheme can sometimes express a more complex set of meanings than a whole sentence. He do not usually reali'e how semantically complex a word is until we have to translate it into a language which does not have an e-uivalent for it. +xample" in 1ra'ilian, arrua+,o means #clearing the ground under coffee trees of rubbish and piling it in the middle of the row in order to aid in the recovery of beans dropped during harvesting$. The source and target languages make different distinctions in meaning Hhat one language regards as an important distinction in meaning another language may not perceive as relevant. For example, &ndonesian makes a distinction between going out in the rain without the knowledge that it is raining (kehujanan) and going out in the rain with the knowledge that it is raining (hujan%hujanan). +nglish does not make this distinction. The target language lacks a superordinate The target language may have specific words (hyponyms) but no general word (superordinate) to head the semantic field. <ussian has no ready e-uivalent for facilities, meaning Bany e-uipment, building, services, etc. &t does have several specific words and expressions which can be thought of as types of facilities. The target language lacks a specific term (hyponym) (ore commonly, languages tend to have general words (superordinates) but lack specific ones (hyponyms). +nglish has many hyponyms under article" feature" survey" report" criti ue" commentary" review . >ifferences in physical or interpersonal perspective 5hysical perspective may be of more importance in one language than it is in another. 5hysical perspective has to do with where things or people are in relation to one another or to a place" come@go, arrive@depart. For example, apanese has six e-uivalents for give, depending on who gives to whom. >ifferences in expressive meaning There may be a target%language word which has the same propositional meaning as the source%language word, but it may have a different expressive meaning. The difference may be considerable or it may be subtle but important enough to pose a translation problem. &t is usually easier to add expressive meaning than to subtract it. &f the target%language e-uivalent is neutral compared to the source%language item, the translator can sometimes add the evaluative element by means of a modifier or adverb if necessary, or by building it in somewhere else in the text. For instance, +nglish verb batter by the more neutral apanese verb tata(u J savagely or ruthlessly. (ore difficult to handle when the target%language e-uivalent is more emotionally loaded than the source%language item. Homose&uality is not pejorative word in +nglish, but it is in 0rabic. >ifferences in form There is often no e-uivalent in the target language for a particular form in the source text. 2ertain suffixes and prefixes often have no direct e-uivalents in other languages. +xample" employer)employee. 0rabic, for instance, has no ready mechanism for producing such forms and so they are often replaced by an appropriate paraphrase, depending on the meaning they convey (e.g. retrievable as Bcan be retrieved! and drinkable as Bsuitable for drinking!). 4uch affixes are often used creatively in +nglish to coin new words for various reasons, such as filling temporary semantic gaps in the language and creating humour. >ifferences in fre-uency and purpose of using specific forms +ven when a particular form does have a ready e-uivalent in the target language, there may be a difference in the fre-uency with or the purpose for which it is used. +nglish, for instance, uses the continuous King form for binding clauses much more fre-uently than other languages rendering every King form in an +nglish source text with an e-uivalent King form in a 8erman, >anish, or 4wedish target text would result in stilted, unnatural style. The use of loan words in the source text a special problem in translation are loan words such as chic" al fresco in +nglish are often used for their prestige value, because they add an air of sophistication. This is often lost in translation because it is not possible to find a loan word with the same meaning in the target language. 3oan words also pose another problem for the unwary translator, namely the problem of #a! e #rien, - or #a$% a'i as they are often called. Fa! e #rien, are words or expressions which have the same form in two or more languages but convey different meanings. They are often associated with historically or culturally related languages such as +nglish, French, and 8erman, but in fact false friends also abound among totally unrelated languages such as +nglish, apanese, and <ussian. 4ome false friends are easy to spot because the difference in their meanings is so great that only a very inexperienced translator is likely to be unaware of it. +nglish feminist with a apanese feminist ( feminist in apanese is usually used to describe a man who is excessively soft with women). +nglish sensible with 8erman sensible (meaning #sensitive$. &t is important to assess its significance and implications in a given context. &t is neither possible nor desirable to reproduce every aspect of meaning for every word in a source text. He have to try, as much as possible, to convey the meaning of key words which are focal to the understanding and development of a text, but we cannot and should not distract the reader by looking at every word in isolation and attempting to present him@her with a full linguistic account of its meaning. 2.&.2.2.Strategie $ e, .( pro#e iona! tran !ator Translation by a more general word (superordinate) This is one of the commonest strategies. &t works e-ually well in most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language%specific. Translation by a more neutral@less expressive word varieties like this trange $niD$e lily flower (-&otic has no e-uivalent in 2hinese and other oriental languages) Translation by cultural substitution replacing a culture%specific item or expression with a target%language item which does not have the same propositional meaning but is likely to have a similar impact on the target reader. The translator!s decision to use this strategy will largely depend on (a) how much licence is given to him@ her by those who commission the translation and (b)the purpose of the translation. +xample" porca, porca, porca, porca . I bitch, bitch, bitch. 5orca is literally the female of swine. 0 translator!s footnote explains that the &talian word Bwhen applied to a woman, . . . indicates unchastity, harlotry. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation .nce explained, the loan word can then be used on its own. Translation by paraphrase using a related word This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicali'ed in the target language but in a different form, and when the fre-uency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language. .verlooking I which overlooks Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words 0l fresco I in the open Translation by omission &t does not harm to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. Translation by illustration This is a useful option if the word which lacks an e-uivalent in the target language refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has to remain short, concise, and to the point.

&.

ECUI;ALENCE A1O;E )ORD LE;EL what happens when words start combining with other words to form stretches of language. Hords rarely occur on their ownG they almost always occur in the company of other words. 1ut words are not strung together at random in any languageG there are always restrictions on the way they can be combined to convey meaning. .ne of the rules of +nglish, for example, is that a determiner cannot come after a noun. 3exical patterning will be dealt with under two main headings" "o!!o"ation and i,io' an, #i%e, e%pre ion : &.1. Co!!o"ation 0nother way of looking at "o!!o"ation would be to think of it in terms of the tendency of certain words to co%occur regularly in a given language. 0t one level, the tendency of certain words to co%occur has to do with their propositional meanings. For example, che ue is more likely to occur with ban(" pay" money. 7owever, meaning cannot always account for collocational patterning. &f it did, we might expect carry out, undertake or even perform to collocate with visit. Cet, +nglish speakers typically pay a visit, less typically ma(e a visit, and are unlikely to perform a visit. +nglish speakers typically break rules but they do not break regulations G they typically talk of wasting time but not of s-uandering time. 1oth deliver a verdict and pronounce a verdict are acceptable collocations in +nglish. 3ikewise, pronounce a sentence is acceptable and means more or less the same as deliver@pronounce a verdict. &n the process of childbirth, 0rabic focuses on the woman, whereas +nglish prefers to focus on the baby. >ifferences in collocational patterning among languages are not just a -uestion of using, a different verb with a given nounG they can involve totally different ways of portraying an event. 4ome collocations are in fact a direct reflection of the material, social, or moral environment in which they occur. This explains why bread collocates with butter in +nglish but not in 0rabic. 1uy a house is a fre-uent collocation in +nglish, but in 8erman it is very rare because the practice of house% buying is very different in the two cultures. &.1.1. Co!!o"ationa! range an, "o!!o"ationa! 'ar/e,ne +very word in a language can be said to have a range of items with which it is compatible, to a greater or lesser degree. <ange here refers to the set of collocates, which are typically associated with the word in -uestion. 4ome words have a much broader collocational range than others. .un, by contrast, has a vast collocational range, some of its typical collocates being company" business" show" car" stoc(ings" tights" nose" wild" debt" bill" river" course" water" and colour , among others. The first is its level of specificity. The second factor which determines the collocational range of an item is the number of senses it has. (ost words have several senses. statements about collocation are made in terms of what is typical or untypical rather than what is admissible or inadmissible. This means that there is no such thing as an impossible collocation. 5atterns of collocation which have a history of recurrence in the language become part of our standard linguistic repertoire and we do not stop to think about them when we encounter them in text. &n wording his@her message, a speaker or writer has two broad options. 4@he can reinforce the patterns of collocation which already exist in the language by adhering to them. The difference between compulsive gambler and heavy gambler is that the first is a common collocation in +nglish, whereas the second represents an attempt to extend the range of heavy to include heavy gambler, by analogy with heavy smoker and heavy drinker. This kind of natural extension of a range is far less striking than 'ar/e,. 0 'ar/e, collocation being an unusual combination of words, one that challenges our expectations as hearers or readers. (arked collocations are often used in fiction, poetry, humour, and advertisements because they can create unusual images, produce laughter and catch the reader!s attention. Har normally breaks out, but peace prevails. These unmarked collocations suggest that war is a temporary and undesirable situation and that peace is a normal and desirable one. He create new collocation all the time. The established patterns in a language can therefore be used as a backdrop against which new images and new meanings can be invoked. &.1.2. Co!!o"ation an, regi ter 2ollocational patterns are not always typical@untypical in relation to the language system as a whole. 4ome collocations may seem untypical in everyday language but are common in specific registers. 0 reader who is not familiar with the register of statistics may wrongly assume that these collocations are marked. 2ollocational markedness always depends on what the norm is in a given register. &n order to translate computer literature, a translator must be aware that in +nglish computer texts, data may be handled" e&tracted" processed" manipulated , and retrieved, but not typically shifted" treated" arranged" or tac(led . 1eing a native speaker of a language does not automatically mean that the translator can assess the acceptability or typicality of register%specific collocations. This is largely why courses in speciali'ed and technical language form an important component of translation training syllabuses. &.1.&. Co!!o"ationa! 'eaning $ry means free from water. 0s we move away it becomes clear that the meaning of dry depends largely on its pattern of collocation and is not something that the word possesses in isolation. Hhat a word means often depends on its association with certain collocates ( dry cow" dry sound" dry boo(" dry bread" dry humour" dry wine/ ). 0 translator who renders dry voice for instance as #a voice which is not moist$ would be midtranslating dry in this context, having failed to recogni'e that with voice means #cold$. +ven when appears to be a close match between collocational patterns in two languages, they may not carry the same meaning. To run a car in +nglish means #to own, use, and be able to maintain a car financially. &n modern 8reek simply means that it is being driven fast. &.1.5. So'e "o!!o"ation re!ate, pit#a!! an, pro.!e' in tran !ation >ifferences in the collocational patterning can pose various problems in translation. 4ome are more difficult to handle than others. The following are some of the more common pitfalls. &.1.5.1.T3e engro ing e##e"t o# o$r"e te%t patterning &t is easy to assume that as long as a collocation can be found in the target language which conveys the same or a similar meaning to that of the source collocation, the translator will not be confused by differences in the surface patterning between the two. Translators sometimes get -uite engrossed in the source text and may produce the oddest collocations in the target language. The translator should have used ressemeler ses chaussures (Bresole his shoes!), which is a far more natural collocation in French. 2onfusing source and target patterns is a pitfall that can easily be avoided once the translator is alerted to the potential influence that the collocational patterning of the source text can have on him@her. 0 good method of detaching oneself from the source text is to put the draft translation aside for a few hours. .ne can then return to the target text with a better chance of responding to its patterning as a target reader eventually would, having not been exposed to and therefore influenced by the source%text patterning in the first place. 0t any rate, translators are well advised to avoid carrying over source%language collocational patterns which are untypical of the target language, unless there is a very good reason for doing so. &.1.5.2.Mi interpreting t3e 'eaning o# a o$r"e9!ang$age "o!!o"ation 0 translator can easily misinterpret a collocation in the source text due to interference from his@her native language. This happens when a source%language collocation appears to be familiar because it corresponds in form to a common collocation in the target language assuming that the professional translator would normally be working from a foreign language into his@her native language or language of habitual use. &.1.5.&.T3e ten ion .et2een a""$ra"( an, nat$ra!ne a translator ideally aims at producing a collocation which is typical in the target language while, at the same time, preserving the meaning associated with the source collocation. This ideal cannot always be achieved. Translation often involves a tension K a difficult choice between what is typical and what is accurate. 0 good)bad law in +nglish is typically a #just@unjust law$ in 0rabic. hard drink in 0rabic is Balcoholic drinks!. 1ut hard drink refers only to spirits in +nglish, for example whisky, gin, and brandy. &t does not include other alcoholic drinks such as beer. The 0rabic collocation, however, refers to any alcoholic drink. The meanings of the two collocations therefore do not map completely. &t will depend on whether the distinction between hard and soft alcoholic drinks is significant or relevant in a given context. 0 certain amount of loss, addition, or skewing of meaning is often unavoidable in translation. 0ccuracy is no doubt an important aim in translation, but it is also important to bear in mind that the use of common target%language patterns which are familiar to the target reader plays an important role in keeping the communication channels open. 7ere are some examples of translations which have opted for naturalness at the expense of accuracy.

&.1.5.5.C$!t$re9 pe"i#i" "o!!o"ation 4ome collocations reflect the cultural setting in which they occur. &n +nglish academic writing, it is common and acceptable to talk aboutB lesser% known languages!, as well as Bmajor languages! and Bminor languages!. <ussian has no e-uivalent collocations. The translator of the above extract seems to be aware of the oddity of such associations in <ussian and their potential for causing offence. 7ence, inverted commas are used around Bsmall! and Bbig!, they are each followed by a paraphrase, and the whole expression is preceded by Bso%called!, which serves to distance the writer@translator from the associations made. 4ometimes, translators opt for accuracy of meaning. &t is unfortunate that some translators still feel that their job is to reproduce everything in the source text, come what may. The collocations damaged hair and brittle hair have no close e-uivalents in 0rabic. (oreover, it is doubtful whether Bdamaged hair! and Bbrittle hair! would, in fact, be seen as problems by the average 0rab. 5eople only seek solutions for problems they are aware of or which they are likely to have. &.1.5.:.Mar/e, "o!!o"ation in t3e o$r"e te%t /nusual combinations of words are sometimes used in the source text in order to create new images. &deally, the translation of a marked collocation will be similarly marked in the target language. This is, however, always subject to the constraints of the target language and to the purpose of the translation in -uestion. E%a'p!e A 2anada has chosen to Bentrench! its dual cultural heritage. 1a"/ tran !ation" 2anada has chosen to Fin ertG E the word is alas in fashionL K its double cultural 3eritage in its institutions The reader of the source text is alerted to the writer!s wish to communicate an unusual image by the inverted commas around entrench. &n the target text, the marked collocation is further highlighted by means of an interjection from the translator (Bthe word is alas in fashion!) E%a'p!e 1 He call this phenomenon Bkitchen 8erman!, from the observation among many adults of +uropean background (,). 1a"/ tran !ation: &nspiring us from the name Bkitchen 8erman!, we shall say that there is a Bcooking! language as one has been able to observe among a number of adults of +uropean origin. The use of inverted commas around marked collocations in the source and target texts. 3anguage is not made up of a large number of words which can be used together in free variation. Hords have a certain tolerance of compatibility. 2ollocational patterns carry meaning and can be culture%specific. This, in addition to their largely arbitrary nature, gives rise to numerous pitfalls and problems in translation. &.2. I,io' an, #i%e, e%pre ion 2ollocations are fairly flexible patterns of language which allow several variations in form. although the meaning of a word often depends on what other words it occurs with, we can still say that the word in -uestion has an individual meaning in a given collocation. Thus, dry cow means a cow which does not produce milk. 0 particular meaning associated with the word dry in this collocation. &dioms and fixed expressions are at the extreme end of the scale from collocations in one or both of these areas" flexibility of patterning and transparency of meaning. They are fro'en patterns of language which allow little or no variation in form and, in the case of idioms, often carry meanings which cannot be deduced from their individual components. 0 speaker or writer cannot normally do any of the following with an idiom" 2hange the order of the word >elete a word form 0dd a word to it <eplace a word with another 2hange its grammatical structure Fixed expressions allow little or no variation in form. &n this respect, they behave very much like idioms. /nlike idioms fixed expressions and proverbs often have fairly transparent meanings. in spite of its transparency, the meaning of a fixed expression or proverb is somewhat more than the sum meanings of its wordsG the expression has to be taken as one unit to establish meaning. +ncountering any fixed expression conjures up in the mind of the reader or hearer all the aspects of experience which are associated with the typical contexts in which the expression is used. fixed and semi%fixed expressions in any language. They encapsulate all the stereotyped aspects of experience and therefore perform a stabili'ing function in communication. 0ours sincerely is an exampleG special status. &.2.1. I,io' - #i%e, e%pre ion - an, t3e ,ire"tion o# tran !ation 0lthough most idioms resist variation in form, some are more flexible than others. 0 person!s competence in actively using the idioms and fixed expressions of a foreign language hardly ever matches that of a native speaker. The majority of translators working into a foreign language cannot hope to achieve the same sensitivity that native speakers seem to have for judging when and how an idiom can be manipulated. This lends support to the argument that translators should only work into their language of habitual use or mother tongue. The 2ode of 5rofessional +thics of the Translators! 8uild of 8reat 1ritain states. 0 translator shall work only into the language (in exceptional cases this may include a second language) of which he has native knowledge. 0ssuming that a professional translator would work only into his@her language of habitual use, the difficulties associated with being able to use idioms and fixed expressions correctly in a foreign language need not be addressed here. The main problems that idiomatic and fixed expressions pose in translation relate to two main areas" the ability to recogni'e and interpret an idiom correctlyG and the difficulties involved in rendering the various aspects of meaning that an idiom or a fixed expression conveys into the target language. These difficulties are much more pronounced in the case of idioms than they are in the case of fixed expressions. &.2.2. T3e interpretation o# i,io' The first difficulty that a translator comes across is being able to recogni'e that s@he is dealing with an idiomatic expression. Fot always so obvious. =arious types of idioms. +asely recogni'able include expressions which violate truth conditions, such as It%s raining cats and dogs , They also include expressions which seem ill%formed because they do not follow the grammatical rules of the language. +xpressions which start with like (simile%like structures) also tend to suggest that they should not be interpreted literally. the more difficult an expression is to understand and the less sense it makes in a given context, the more likely a translator will recogni'e it as an idiom. 1ecause they do not make sense if interpreted literally. 5rovided a translator has access to good reference works and monolingual dictionaries of idioms, or, better still, is able to consult native speakers of the language. Two cases in which an idiom can be easily misinterpreted if one is not already familiar with it. 4ome idioms are Bmisleading!G they seem transparent because they offer a reasonable literal interpretation and their idiomatic meanings are not necessarily signalled in the surrounding text. 3iteral and an idiomatic meaning. 4uch idioms lend themselves easily to manipulation by speakers and writers who will sometimes play on both their literal and idiomatic meanings. &n this case, a translator who is not familiar with the idiom in -uestion may easily accept the literal interpretation and miss the play on idiom. 0n idiom in the source language may have a very close counterpart in the target language which looks similar on the surface but has a totally or partially different meaning. Has the cat had)got your tongue1 &t!s used in +nglish to urge someone to answer a -uestion or contribute to a conversation. 0 similar expression is used in French with a totally different meaning" donner sa langue au chat (Bto give one!s tongue to the at!),meaning to give up, for example when asked a riddle. To pull someone%s leg" meaning to tell someone something untrue as a joke. &nstances of superficially identical or similar idioms which have different meanings in the source and target languages lay easy traps for the unwary translator who is not familiar with the source%language idiom and who may be tempted simply to impose a target%language interpretation on it. 0

translator must also consider the collocational environment which surrounds any expression whose meaning is not readily accessible. &diomatic and fixed expressions have individual collocational patterns. They form collocations with other items in the text as single units and enter into lexical sets which are different from those of their individual words. To have a cold feet. The ability to distinguish senses by collocation is an invaluable asset to a translator working from a foreign language. &t is often subsumed under the general umbrella of Brelying on the context to disambiguate meanings!. /sing our knowledge of collocational patterns may not always tell us what an idiom means but it could easily help us in many cases to recogni'e an idiom, particularly one which has a literal as well as a non%literal meaning. &.2.&. T3e tran !ation o# i,io' : ,i##i"$!tie .nce an idiom or fixed expression has been recogni'ed and interpreted correctly, the next step is to decide how to translate it into the target language. The main difficulties" 0n idiom or fixed expression may have no e-uivalent in the target language. 3ike single words, idioms and fixed expressions may be culture%specific. &dioms and fixed expressions which contain culture%specific items are not necessarily untranslatable. For example" to carry coals to 2ewcastle is closely parallel in 8ermany (Bto carry owls to 0thens$). 1oth have the same meaning" to supply something to someone who already has plenty of it. 0n idiom or fixed expression may have a similar counterpart in the target language, but its context of use may be differentG the two expressions may have different connotations, for instance, or they may not be pragmatically transferable. 0n idiom may be used in the source text in both its literal and idiomatic senses at the same time. /nless the target%language idiom corresponds to the source%language idiom both in form and in meaning, the play on idiom cannot be successfully reproduced in the target text. The very convention of using idioms in written discourse, the contexts in which they can be used, and their fre-uency of use may be different in the source and target languages. +nglish uses idioms in many types of texts, though not in all. Their use in -uality%press news reports is limited, but it is -uite common to see idioms in +nglish advertisements, promotional material, and in the tabloid press. /sing idioms in +nglish is very much a matter of style. 3anguages such as 0rabic and 2hinese which make a sharp distinction between written and spoken discourse and where the written mode is associated with a high level of formality, tend, on the whole, to avoid using idioms in written texts. &.2.5. T3e tran !ation o# i,io' : trategie The way in which an idiom or a fixed expression can be translated into another language depends on many factors. &.2.5.1.U ing an i,io' o# i'i!ar 'eaning an, #or' This strategy involves using an idiom in the target language which conveys roughly the same meaning as that of the source% language idiom and, in addition, consists of e-uivalent lexical items. &.2.5.2.U ing an i,io' o# i'i!ar 'eaning .$t ,i i'i!ar #or' &t is often possible to find an idiom or fixed expression in the target language which has a meaning similar to that of the source idiom or expression, but which consists of different lexical items. &.2.5.&.Tran !ation .( parap3ra e This is by far the most common way of translating idioms when a match cannot be found in the target language or when it seems inappropriate to use idiomatic language in the target text because of differences in stylistic preferences of the source and target languages. Cou may or may not find the paraphrases accurateG +xample" to take rough terrain in its stride. 1ack translation" to o4er"o'e the roughness of the terrain. &.2.5.5.Tran !ation .( o'i ion 0n idiom may sometimes be omitted altogether in the target text. This may be because it has no close match in the target language, its meaning cannot be easily paraphrased, or for stylistic reasons. .ne strategy which cannot be ade-uately illustrated, simply because it would take up a considerable amount of space, is the trateg( o# "o'pen ation. 1riefly, this means that one may either omit or play down a feature such as idiomaticity at the point, where it occurs in the source text and introduce it elsewhere in the target text.

TEMA &: DEFININ? ELEMENTS OF NON9SPECIALI@ED TRANSLATION

5. ?RAMMATICAL ECUI;ALENCE one cannot always match the content of a message in language 0 by an expression with exactly the same content in language 1, because what can be expressed and what must be expressed is a property of a specific language in much the same way as how it can be expressed. we tend to rely heavily on existing lexical resources in order to communicate successfully and easily with other members of our language community. 3exical resources are not the only factor which influences the way in which we analyse and report experience. 0nother powerful factor which determines the kind of distinctions we regularly make in reporting experience is the grammatical system of our language. ?ra''ar is the set of rules which determine the way in which units such as words and phrases can be combined in a language and the kind of information which has to be made regularly explicit in utterances. 0 language can, of course, express any kind of information its speakers need to express, but the grammatical system of a given language will determine the ease with which certain notions such as time reference or gender can be made explicit. Time, number and gender. these so%called Bbasic! categories are not in fact universal, and that languages differ widely in the range of notions they choose to make explicit on a regular basis. 5.1. ?ra''ati"a! 4 . !e%i"a! "ategorie 8rammar is organi'ed along two main dimensions" morphology and syntax. (orphology covers the structure of words, the way in which the form of a word changes to indicate specific contrasts in the grammatical system. S(nta% covers the grammatical structure of groups, clauses, and sentences" the linear se-uences of classes of words such as noun, verb, adverb, and adjective, and functional elements such as subject, predicator, and object, which are allowed in a given language. 2hoices in language can be expressed grammatically or lexically, depending on the type and range of linguistic resources available in a given language. 2hoices made from closed systems (singular@plural) are grammaticalG those made from open%ended sets of items or expressions are lexical. 8rammatical choices are normally expressed morphologically. They may also be expressed syntactically, for instance by manipulating the order of elements in a clause to indicate certain relations between the elements or the function of the clause. The most important difference between grammatical and lexical choices is that grammatical choices are largely obligatory while lexical choices are largely optional. 3anguages which have morphological resources for expressing a certain category such as number, tense, or gender, have to express these categories regularly. 1ecause a grammatical choice is drawn from a closed set of options, it is (a) obligatory, and (b) rules out other choices from the same system by default. 0 2hinese or apanese speaker or writer does not have to choose between singular and plural, unless the context demands that this information be made explicit. 8rammatical structure also differs from lexical structure in that it is more resistant to change. &t is much easier to introduce a new word, expression, or collocation into a language than to introduce a new grammatical category, system, or se-uence. The grammatical structure of a language does, of course, change, but this does not happen overnight. 8rammatical change occurs over a much longer time scale than lexical change. .n the whole, the grammatical structure of a language remains fairly constant throughout the lifetime of an individual, whereas one encounters new words, expressions, and collocations on a daily basis. 8rammatical rules are also more resistant to manipulation by speakers. 0 deviant grammatical structure may occasionally be accepted in very restricted contexts, for instance in order to maintain rhyme or metre in poetry. 0 very small number of text types, such as poems, advertisements, and jokes, will occasionally manipulate or flout the grammatical rules of the language to create special effect. .n the whole, however, deviant grammatical configurations are simply not acceptable in most contexts. &n translation, grammar often has the effect of a straitjacket, forcing the translator along a certain course which may or may not follow that of the source text as closely as the translator would like it to. 5.2. T3e ,i4er it( o# gra''ati"a! "ategorie a"ro !ang$age &t is difficult to find a notional category which is regularly and uniformly expressed in all languages. +ven categories such as time and number are only optionally indicated in some 0sian languages such as 2hinese and =ietnamese. a number of 0merican &ndian languages such as Cana and Favaho have grammatical categories which in many other languages would hardly ever be expressed even by lexical means. 4ome languages, such as 0muesha of 5eru, regularly indicate whether a person is dead or alive by adding a suffix to the name of any person referred to after his@her death. 3anguages therefore differ widely in the way they are e-uipped to handle various notions and express various aspects of experience. Time is regarded as a crucial aspect of experience in +nglish. past, present, or future. &n 0'tec, the notion of deference is regarded as crucial. >egree or respect. >ifferences in the grammatical structures of the source and target languages often result in some change in the information content of the message during the process of translation. This change may take the form of adding to the target text information which is not expressed in the source text. This can happen when the target language has a grammatical category which the source language lacks. &n translating from +nglish or French into an 0merican &ndian language such as Cana or Favaho, one would have to add information concerning the shape of any objects. >etails which are ignored in the source text but which have to be specified in the target language can pose a serious dilemma for the translator if they cannot be reasonably inferred from the context. &f the target language lacks a grammatical category which exists in the source language, the information expressed by that category may have to be ignored. This is true in theory, but in practice the lack of a grammatical device can make the translation of Bthe entire conceptual information very difficult indeed. The fre-uency of occurrence of such optional information tends to be low. The fact that lexical choices are optional gives them more weight than grammatical choices. 5.2.1. N$'.er The idea of countability is probably universal in the sense that it is readily accessible to all human beings and is expressed in the lexical structure of all languages. 7owever, not all languages have a grammatical category of number. +nglish recogni'es a distinction between one and more than one (singular and plural). This distinction has to be expressed morphologically, by adding a suffix to a noun or by changing its form in some other way to indicate whether it refers to one or more than one. 4ome languages, such as apanese, 2hinese, and =ietnamese, prefer to express the same notion lexically or, more often, not at all. >oes not normally indicate whether it is singular or plural. most languages have a grammatical category of number, similar but not necessarily identical to that of +nglish. &n most +uropean languages today, dual is a lexical rather than a grammatical category. 0 small number of languages, such as Fijian, even distinguish between singular, dual, trial and plural. 0 translator has two main options" s@he can (a) omit the relevant information on number, or (b) encode this information lexically. &t may sometimes be necessary or desirable in certain contexts to specify plurality or duality in languages which do not normally specify such information because they do not have a category of number or a dual form. the translator may decide to encode the relevant information lexically, as in the following examples. 5.2.2. ?en,er ?en,er is a grammatical distinction according to which a noun or pronoun is classified as either masculine or feminine in some languages. French distinguishes between masculine and feminine gender in nouns such as fils)fille (Bson!@Bdaughter!) and chat)chatte (Bmale cat!@Bfemale cat!). Founs such as maga3ine and construction (Bconstruction!) are also classified as masculine and feminine respectively. +nglish does not have a grammatical category of gender as suchG The gender distinction nevertheless exists in some semantic areas and in the per on system. >ifferent nouns are sometimes used to refer to female and male members of the same species" cow@bull, sow@boar, doe@stag, mare@stallion, ewe@ram. 0 small number of nouns which refer to professions have masculine and feminine forms, with the suffix Kess indicating feminine gender" actor)actress" manager)manageress, host)hostess" and steward)stewardess. 7owever, do not always reflect straightforward gender distinctions as in the case of other +uropean languagesG some of them carry specific connotations. The distinction between author and authoress may carry more expressive than prepositional meaning" authoress tends to have derogatory overtones. +nglish also has a category of per on which distinguishes in the third%person singular between masculine, feminine, and inanimate (he@she@it ). This distinction does not apply to the third%person plural (they). .n the other hand, languages like French and &talian maintain the gender distinction in the third%person plural" for example, ils vs . ells in French. 0rabic has different forms for Byou!, depending on whether the person or persons addressed is@are male or female. .ther languages such as 2hinese and &ndonesian do not have gender distinctions in their person systems at all. &n most languages that have a gender category, the masculine term is usually the Bdominant! or Bunmarked! term. &n French elles is used only when all the persons or things referred to are feminine. This means that the use of feminine forms provides more specific information than the use of masculine forms can be said to provide. There is now a conscious attempt

to replace the unmarked masculine form he in +nglish with forms such as s@he, he or she, and him or her. This is particularly true of academic writing. 4hairman, being replaced by more neutral ones such as chairperson. This ideological stance is somewhat difficult to transfer into languages in which gender distinctions pervade the grammatical system. 8ender distinctions are generally more relevant in translation when the referent of the noun or pronoun is human. 8ender distinctions in inanimate objects such as Bcar! or Bship! and in animals are sometimes manipulated in +nglish to convey expressive meaning, particularly in literature, but they do not often cause difficulties in non%literary translation. (+nglish table" French la)une table ). 0n 0rabic speaker or writer has to select between Byou, masculine! ( anta) and Byou, feminine! ( anti). &n translating the imperative verbs in the above text into 0rabic, the translator would normally have to choose, as far as gender is concerned, between a masculine and a feminine form for each verb. 5.2.&. Per on The category of person relates to the notion of participant roles. &n most languages, participant roles are systematically defined through a closed system of pronouns which may be organi'ed along a variety of dimensions. The most common distinction is that between first person, second person and third person. 0 number of languages spoken in Forth 0merica have four rather than three distinctions in the category of person. &n these languages, the fourth person refers to Ba person or thing distinct from one already referred to by a third person form!. The person system may be organi'ed along a variety of other dimensions. The person system in some languages may have a gender or number dimension which applies to the whole system or to parts of it. 0lthough number is not a grammatical category in 2hinese, the pronoun system in 2hinese features a number distinction. .n the other hand, it does not feature any gender distinctions at all. &n apanese, the person system features distinctions in gender as well as social status and level of intimacy. 4ome languages have rather elaborate person systems. 0 large number of modern +uropean languages have a formality@politeness dimension in their person system. &n such languages, a pronoun other than the second%person singular, usually the second% or third%person plural, is used in interaction with a singular addressee in order to express deference and@or non%familiarity" French vous as opposed to tuG 4panish usted as opposed to tuG 0ll languages have modes of address which can be used to express familiarity or deference in a similar way, cf. the difference between you" mate" dear" darling" and Mr Smith" Sir" 5rofessor Brown" Mrs 6ones" Madam . &n translating pronouns from +nglish to, say, French, &talian, 8reek, 4panish, decisions may have to be made along such dimensions as gender, degree of intimacy between participants, or whether reference includes or excludes the addressee. This information may or may not be readily recoverable from the context. Translating in the other direction, from one of the above languages into +nglish, will fre-uently involve loss of information along the dimensions in -uestion. 5.2.5. Ten e an, a pe"t Tense and aspect are grammatical categories in a large number of languages. The form indicates two main types of information" time relations and aspectual differences. Time relations have to do with locating an event in time. 5ast, present and future. 0spectual differences have to do with the temporal distribution of an event, for instance its completion nor non%completion, continuation, or momentariness. &n some languages, the tense and aspect system, or parts of it, may be highly developed. 4ome languages, such as 2hinese, (alay, and Curok, have no formal category of tense or aspect. &f necessary, time reference can be indicated by means of various particles and adverbials. +xample 0 has become7 1ack translated from 2hinese already become. +xample 1 rhododendron were collected by 89th century. 1ack translated from 2hinese rhododendron collect :ed; by 89th century. The connotations of pastness in the above extract can be inferred from the context, because of the reference to nineteenth%century botanists. 0lthough the main use of the grammatical categories of tense and aspect is to indicate time and aspectual relations, they do not necessarily perform the same function in all languages. Tense and aspect distinctions may also take on additional, more subtle meanings in discourse. &n +nglish and 1ra'ilian some verbs refer to what is stated in the academic paper itself (indicative verbs), while other vebs refer to what was actually done in the research on which the paper reports (informative verbs). The present tense is used for indicative and the past tense for informative statements. &n +nglish science and engineering academic abstracts, the present perfect is specifically used to refer to the work of other scientists. For example, It is proposed that . . .suggests that the writer of the abstract is doing the proposing, but It has been proposed that . . . suggests that the proposing is done by someone other than the writer. 5.2.:. ;oi"e The use of the passive voice is extremely common in many varieties of written +nglish and can pose various problems in translation, depending on the availability of similar structures, or structures with similar functions, in the target language. 1ecause of its widespread use in technical and scientific +nglish in particular, it has had a strong influence on similar registers in other languages through translation. The tendency to translate +nglish passive structures literally into a variety of target languages which either have no passive voice as such or which would normally use it with less fre-uency is often critici'ed by linguists and by those involved in training translators. =oice is a grammatical category which defines the relationship between a verb and its subject. &n active clauses, the subject is the agent responsible for performing the action. &n passive clauses, the subject is the affected entity, and the agent may or may not be specified, depending on the structures available in each language. The form of the verb changes in a passive structure to indicate that its subject is the affected entity rather than the agent. 2hinese verbs have no voice. The main function of the passive in most languages is to allow the construction of #agentless$ clauses. (ost languages have a variety of mechanisms for constructing Bagentless! clauses. 3anguages which have a category of voice do not always use the passive with the same fre-uency. 8erman uses the passive much less fre-uently than +nglish. The same is true of <ussian and French. 4cientific and technical writing in +nglish relies heavily on passive structures to give the impression of objectivity and to distance the writer from the statements made in the text. <endering a passive structure by an active structure, or conversely an active structure by a passive structure in translation can affect the amount of information given in the clause, the linear arrangement of semantic elements such as agent and affected entity, and the focus of the message. 7owever, one must weigh this potential change in content and focus against the benefits of rendering a smooth, natural translation in contexts where the use of the passive for instance would be stylistically less acceptable than the use of the active or an alternative structure in the target language. &n some languages, notably apanese, 2hinese, =ietnamese, and Thai, the main function of the passive, or passive%like structures as in the case of 2hinese, is to express adversity. The passive is traditionally used to report unfortunate eventsG The idea is not to replace an active form with an active one and a passive form with a passive oneG it is always the function of a category rather than the form it takes that is of paramount importance in translation. The expression of modal meanings, for instance, can vary widely from language to language and has to be handled sensitively and carefully in translation. (odality or modal meanings have to do with the attitude of the speaker to the hearer or to what is being said, with such things as certainty, possibility, and obligation. .ther grammatical categories which can pose difficulties in translation include mood, direct and indirect speech, causativity, and many others. Translators should find it useful to investigate and compare the expression of such categories and the meanings associated with various structures in their source and target languages. 5.&. A .rie# note on 2or, or,er The syntactic structure of a language imposes restrictions on the way messages may be organi'ed in that language. The order in which functional elements such as subject, predicator, and object may occur is more fixed in some languages than in others. 3anguages vary in the extent to which they rely on word order to signal the relationship between elements in the clause. 2ompared to languages such as 8erman, 0rabic, word order in +nglish is relatively fixed. The meaning of a sentence in +nglish, depends entirely on the order in which the elements are placed. 4ome languages have "a e in#!e"tion. &n such languages, the form of a noun changes depending on its functions in the clause. 3anguages which have elaborate systems of case inflections tend to have fewer restrictions on word order than languages like +nglish which have very few case inflections. &n languages with elaborate case inflections, word order is largely a matter of stylistic variation and is available as a resource to signal emphasis and contrast and to organi'e messages in a variety of ways. Hord order is extremely important in translation because it plays a major role in maintaining a coherent point of view and in orienting messages at text level. 5.5. Intro,$"ing te%t As part of a language system, lexical items and grammatical structures have a Bmeaning potential!. This Bmeaning potential! is only reali'ed in communicative events, that is, in text. Text is the verbal record of a communicative event. 5.5.1. Te%t 4 . non9te%t 0s translators, we have to operate with lexical items and grammatical structures at various stages of the translation process. &mperative that we view the text as a whole both at the beginning and at the end of the process and got a Bgist! of the overall message. 1ut this is only the first step. .nce the source text is understood, the translator then has

:.

to tackle the task of producing a target version which can be accepted as a text in its own right. The phraseology and the collocational and grammatical patterning of the target version must conform to target%language norms, but even then the translation may still sound foreign or clumsy. &t may not even make sense to the target reader. 0cceptable collocational patterns and grammatical structures can only enhance the readability of individual sentences, but they do not in themselves ensure that sentences and paragraphs add up to a readable or coherent text. 0 text has features of organi'ation which distinguish it from non%text, that is, from a random collection of sentences and paragraphs. These features of text organi'ation are language% and culture%specific. +ach linguistic community has preferred ways of organi'ing its various types of discourse. This is why target readers can often identify what appears to be a lexically and grammatically Bnormal! text as a translation, or as Bforeign!. 0 translation may be undertaken for a variety of purposes. He will assume that the ultimate aim of a translator, in most cases, is to achieve a measure of e-uivalence at text level, rather than at word or phrase level. The translator will need to adjust certain features of source%text organi'ation in line with preferred ways of organi'ing discourse in the target language. There is a long tradition both in linguistics and in literary studies of analysing the works of individual writers, particularly literary writers, but relatively little work has been done on such areas of text studies as the conventions of non%literary writing within a community or the preferred patterns of organi'ation in different types of discourse. =ery little is available in the way of describing the types of texts available in, say, 2hinese or 4panish, or of how such texts are organi'ed. 5.5.2. Feat$re o# te%t organi+ation 0ny text, in any language, exhibits certain linguistic features which allow us to identify it as a text. He identify a stretch of language as a text partly because it is presented to us as a text, and we therefore do our utmost to make sense of it as a unit, and partly because we perceive connections within and among its sentences. These connections are of several kinds" 2onnections which are established through the arrangement of information within each clause and the way this relates to the arrangement of information in preceding and following clauses and sentencesG these contribute mainly to topic development and maintenance through t3e'ati" and in#or'ation tr$"t$re . 4urface connections which establish interrelationships between persons and eventsG these allow us to trace participants in a text and to interpret the way in which different parts of the text relate to each other. /nderlying semantic connections which allow us to #make sense$ of text as a unit of meaningG these are dealt with under the heading of "o3eren"e and i'p!i"at$re. 0nother important feature derives from the overlapping notions of genre and text type. Texts have been classified in two main ways to capture this type of Bpackaging!. The first and more straightforward classification is based on the contexts in which texts occur and results in institutionali'ed labels such as Bjournal article!, Bscience textbook!, Bnewspaper editorial!, or Btravel brochure!. The second is a more subjective, less institutionali'ed and therefore much vaguer classification which does not normally apply to a whole text but rather to parts of it. Typical labels Bnarration!, Bexposition!, Bargumentation!, and Binstruction!. 1oth types of classification are useful in defining translation problems and in justifying specific strategies to overcome them. <eference to institutionali'ed genres, such as Breligious texts! and Bnewspaper editorial!. TEATUAL ECUI;ALENCE: THEMATIC AND INFORMATION STRUCTURES 0 translator should be aware not only of cognitive meanings and basic syntactic structures in his text, but also of its information dynamics. 3inear arrangement, then, has a role to play in processing information and organi'ing messages at text level. .f the numerous formulations available for expressing a given message, a speaker or writer will normally opt for one that makes the flow of information clearer in a given context. &n order to appreciate the factors which motivate a writer or speaker to make this kind of selection, one needs to think of the clause as a message rather than as a string of grammatical and lexical elements. .ver and above its prepositional organi'ation in terms of elements such as subject@object and agent@ patient, a clause also has an interactional organi'ation which reflects the addresser@addressee relationship. 2lause as a message can be analy'ed in terms of two types of structure" thematic structure and information structure. There are two main approaches to the analysis of clause as a message. The 7allidayan approach treats thematic and information structures as separate, though often overlapping features of discourse organi'ation. The two structures are seen to be essentially distinct from each other. :.1. ?enera! o4er4ie2 .a e, on t3e Ha!!i,a(an approa"3 to in#or'ation #!o2 :.1.1. T3e'ati" tr$"t$re: t3e'e an, r3e'e .ne way of explaining the interactional organi'ation of sentences is to suggest that a clause consists of two segments. The first segment is called the theme. The theme is what the clause is about. &t has two functions" (a) it acts as a point of orientation by connecting back to previous stretches of discourse and thereby maintaining a coherent point of view and, (b) it acts as a point of departure by connecting forward and contributing to the development of later stretches. The second segment of a clause is called the r3e'e. The rheme is what the speaker says about the theme. &t is the goal of discourse. 0s such, it is the most important element in the structure of the clause as a message because it represents the very information that the speaker wants to convey to the hearer. &t is the rheme that fulfils the communicative purpose of the utterance. 0 number of interesting points arise from the analysis" :. Thematic analysis can be represented hierarchically. They will have several layers of thematic structure. 9. 4ome elements are not part of the basic thematic structure of the text because they are not part of the propositional meaning of the message. 3inking devices such as however" nevertheless, because (conjunctions). They also include items which express the attitude of the speaker such as unfortunately" in my opinion" fran(ly (disjuncts). 1oth conjunctions and disjuncts usually come at the beginning of +nglish clausesG it is natural for the speaker to place in initial position an element which relates what s@he is about to say to what has been said before (conjunction) or an element which expresses his@her own judgement on what is being said (disjunct) because conjunctions and disjuncts are not part of the propositional content of the message, they are not considered thematic in the same way as the main clause elements $.0e"t- pre,i"ator- o.0e"t- "o'p!e'ent and a,0$n"t. ?. There tends to be a very high correlation between theme@rheme and subject@predicate in the 7allidayan model. The correlation does not hold in the case of 'ar/e, t3e'e - but, generally speaking, the distinction between theme and rheme is more or less identical to the traditional grammatical distinction between subject and predicate . 5lato had divided the sentences into Hno'a and r3e'a. 7owever, the modern distinction between theme and rheme differs from 5lato!s original dichotomy in one important respect. The themeKrheme distinction is text% based. &ts real value does not lie in explaining the structure of individual sentences but rather in T3e'ati" tr$"t$re gra''ati"a!!( 4 a""epta.i!it( /nlike the subjectKpredicate distinction, the notions of theme and rheme can be used to account for the acceptability (rather than grammaticality) of a given se-uence in a given context. Theme and rheme are not grammatical notions. 8rammatical se-uences are part of the abstract system of language. &n context, grammaticality does not necessarily ensure acceptability or coherence. T3e'ati" tr$"t$re: te%t organi+ation an, ,e4e!op'ent The theme%rheme distinction can also be useful in explaining methods of organi'ation and development in different types of text. 0 great deal of emphasis has traditionally been placed on theme rather than on rheme. Theme represents the speaker!s@ writer!s point of departure in each clause, which suggests that its organi'ational role is more important than that of rheme. The selection of an individual theme of a given clause in a given text is not in itself particularly

significant. 1ut the overall choice and ordering of themes, plays an important part in organi'ing a text and in providing a point of orientation for a given stretch of language. Travel brochures, at least in +nglish, are characteri'ed by a proliferation of place adjuncts in theme position. &f the themes of most of the sentences of a paragraph refer to one semantic field (say location, parts of some object, wisdom vs chance, etc.) then that semantic field will be perceived as the method of development of the paragraph. &f no common semantic element runs through the themes of the sentences of a paragraph, then no simple method of development will be perceived. Cou have to ensure that whatever elements you put in initial%clause position in your target text or in a given part of your target text add up to something that can be understood as a method of development and that can provide a point of orientation for that part of the text. T3e'ati" tr$"t$re: 'ar/e, 4 . $n'ar/e, eD$en"e 4pecial relevance in translation because understanding it can help to heighten our awareness of meaningful choices made by speakers and writers in the course of communication. Thematic choice involves selecting a clause element as theme. The main clause elements are $.0e"t- pre,i"atoro.0e"t- "o'p!e'ent- an, a,0$n"t. &n the 7allidayan model, thematic choice is expressed by placing one of these elements in initial position in the clause. Thematic choice is always meaningful because it indicates the speaker!s@writer!s point of departure. 1ut some choices are more meaningful than others, because they are more 'ar/e, than others. (eaning, choice, and markedness are interrelated concepts. (eaning is closely associated with choice, so that the more obligatory an element is, the less marked it will be and the weaker will be its meaning. The fact that adjectives have to be placed in front of nouns in +nglish, for instance, means that their occurrence in this position has little or no significance because it is not the result of choice. .n the other hand, putting a time or place adverbial, such as today or on the shelf, say, at the beginning of the clause, carries more meaning because it is the result of choice" 0 second aspect has to do with the degree of expectedness or unexpectedness of a choice. The less expected a choice, the more marked it is and the more meaning it carriesG the more expected, the less marked it is and the less significance it will have. For example, (as in Beautiful were her eyes, rather than Her eyes were beautiful!. 0 complement is therefore highly marked in this position and indicates a more conscious effort on the part of the speaker@writer to highlight this particular element as his@her point of departure. &t carries more textual meaning than an adverbial occurring in the same position. 5lacing a certain element in theme position does not necessarily constitute a marked thematic choice. &n +nglish, it has been shown that an unmarked theme is one that signals the mood of the clause" in declarative clauses the unmarked theme is the subject ( Jane said nothing for a moment)G in interrogative clauses it is the wh %word ( What did ane sayM), or the auxiliary in the case of polar -uestions ( Did ane say anythingM)G in imperative clauses it is the verb ( Say something). 0 speaker normally signals his@her point of departure by indicating whether s@he is making a statement, asking a -uestion, or giving an order. &n the case of an imperative clause, the verb naturally occupies thematic position because that is what the message is about" getting the addressee to do something. the subject is never selected as theme in an +nglish declarative clause, it occupies that position by default. 1y contrast, a predicator hardly ever occurs in theme position in +nglish declarative clauses, and so, when it does, it is highly marked. Hhat is the function of marked themeM 0 marked theme is selected specifically to foreground a particular element as the topic of the clause or its point of departure. (aking the element in -uestion more prominent or emphasi'ing it. <heme is more important than theme. He might then expect that final rather than initial position in the clause is where prominence can be achieved. &n marked thematic structures, theme position is associated with local prominence at the level of the clause. <heme position, on the other hand, is prominent on an overall discourse level. &n other words, placing an element in theme position gives that element local, temporary prominence within the clause. 5utting an element in rheme position means that it is part of what the speaker has to say, and that is the very core of any message. 5lacing an element in initial position will give it a certain prominence but that it will stillB carry less weight than the actual rheme!. 7allidayan linguists identify three main types of marked theme in +nglish" fronted theme, predicated theme, and identifying theme. Fronte, t3e'e fronting involves Bthe achievement of marked theme by moving into initial position an item which is otherwise unusual there!. Fronting o# ti'e or p!a"e a,0$n"t This is a marked structure, but it is not highly marked because adverbials are fairly mobile elements in +nglish. Themati'ing temporal adjuncts is similarly common in any type of narrative text, that is, any text which recounts a series of events. Fronting o# o.0e"t or "o'p!e'ent O.0e"t: 0 great deal of publicity the book received in 2hina. Co'p!e'ent: Hell publici'ed the book was. The fronting of objects and complements is much more marked than the fronting of adjuncts in +nglish because objects and complements are fairly restricted in position. .bjects and complements are not usually fronted to provide a point of orientation or method of development for a stretch of language. The effect of themati'ing an object or complement in +nglish is to provide contrast and to emphasi'e the speaker!s attitude to the message. Fronting o# pre,i"ator They promised to publici'e the book in 2hina, and publici'e it they did. This is the most marked of all thematic choices in +nglish. This choice also involves re%arranging other clause elements and adjusting the form of the verbal group. Fronted predicators are very rare in +nglish. Pre,i"ati4e t3e'e 5redicating a theme involves using an it9 tr$"t$re (also called a "!e#t tr$"t$re) to place an element near the beginning of the clause, as in It was the boo( that received a great deal of publicity in 4hina. 0part from conjunctions and disjunctions this is the only instance in which the theme of the clause is not the element that occurs in initial position. The theme of an it %structure is not &t but rather the element which occurs after the verb to be. &t simply acts as an empty subject which allows a certain element such as the book or in 2hina to be placed near the beginning of the clause and to be interpreted as its theme, that is, what the message is about. 5redicating an element foregrounds it by placing it in theme position. The subject is the unmarked theme of a declarative clause in +nglish. 3ike all marked themes, predicated themes often imply contrast. &t was in 2hina that the book received a great deal of publicity would generally suggest that in 2hina contrasts with other places where the book did not receive a great deal of publicity. 0nother important function of predicated theme is to signal in#or'ation tr$"t$re by presenting the element following &t J 1+ in the main clause as the new or important item to which the hearer!s@ reader!s attention is drawn. I,enti#(ing t3e'e &dentifying themes are very similar to predicated themes. &nstead of using &t (a cleft structure), an identifying theme places an element in theme position by turning it into a nominali'ation using a wh- tr$"t$re (called a p e$,o9"!e#t tr$"t$re), as in Hhat the book received in 2hina was a great deal of publicity. 1oth predicated and identifying themes are often associated with implicit contrast. They tend to imply that the item in theme position. &t!s chosen from a set of possible items as the one worthy of the hearer!s@reader!s attention. &tems in theme position are prominent in both structures. The difference is that in predicated themes, the thematic element is presented as new informationG in identifying themes, the thematic element is presented as known information. 5redicated and identifying themes are marked but fairly common in +nglish because they offer a themati'ation strategy that overcomes restrictions on word order. They also offer a way of signalling known vs new information independently of the use of intonation. 5redicated and identifying themes tend to be more common in written than in spoken +nglish. 5redicated and identifying themes must be handled carefully in translation because they are far more marked in languages with relatively free word order, such as 8erman, than they are in +nglish. &n addition to fronted, predicated, and identifying themes, other types of marked theme exist in +nglish, but they tend to be much more restricted and more likely to be used in informal language. These are prepo e, t3e'e and po tpo e, t3e'e. 1oth involve using a gloss tag. &n preposed theme, the gloss tag occurs at the beginning of the clause, in postposed theme, it occurs at the end of the clause. 5reposed theme The fitter, he sent these documents to the office. 5ostposed theme 7e sent these documents to the office, the fitter.

A .rie# a e 'ent o# t3e Ha!!i,a(an po ition on t3e'e 2lauses are organi'ed in terms of theme and rheme. 1ut different linguists give different accounts of the way in which theme and rheme are reali'ed in discourse. +ach account is naturally biased towards the native language of the linguist in -uestion as well as other languages with which s@he may be familiar. 7alliday has always insisted that, at least in +nglish, the themeKrheme distinction is reali'ed by the se-uential ordering of clause elements. Theme is the element placed by the speaker in first position in the clauseG rheme is whatever comes after the theme. 0 rhemeKtheme se-uence therefore has no place in 7alliday!s system. 7allidayan view, unlike the rather complex explanations of the 5rague 4chool, it is very simple to follow and apply. To some extent, it is also intuitively satisfying to suggest that what one is talking about always comes before what one has to say about it. &ts disadvantages, on the other hand, include (a) its partial circularity" theme is whatever comes in initial position and whatever comes in initial position is themeG and (b) its failure to relate descriptions of 4=. languages, particularly those with relatively fixed word order such as +nglish, to descriptions of languages with relatively free word order in which, for instance, the verb often occurs in initial position. &f theme is whatever occurs in initial position we would have to acknowledge that some languages prefer to themati'e participants (expressed as subjects in 4=. and 4.= languages) on a regular basis while other languages prefer to themati'e processes (expressed as verbs in =4. languages). 1ut 7alliday does not attempt to address these preferencesG nor does he discuss language features which restrict a speaker!s choice of thematic elements. For instance, in 7arway (a 5apuan language) where the verb is always final, a speaker@writer does not have the option of themati'ing processes. Theme and 2hinese%style topic 2hinese has been identified by 3i as a topi"9pro'inent language. /nlike $.0e"t9pro'inent languages such as +nglish, French, and 8erman, topic%prominent languages appear to have double subjects. 7ow do topics relate to themesM >oes topic mean the same thing as theme, that is, what the message is aboutM 2an topics be translated into languages which are not topic%prominentM The topic of a clause in topic%prominent languages always occurs in initial position. &n this respect, it coincides with theme in 7alliday!s model. &f initial position is reserved for theme and if topic always occurs in initial position, then theme and topic are presumably the same thing. TopicKcomment structures such as those given above are sometimes translated into +nglish as, for instance, 4oncerning animals . . . <bout this field" . . ." <s for fish,. . ., etc. There is, of course, a limit to how often this can be done in +nglish. &tsoveruse by apanese and 2hinese learners of +nglish, for instance, is immediately noticeable. 3i suggest more natural structures for achieving something similar to topicali'ation in +nglish" .emember Tom1 =ell" he fell off his bi(e yesterday. 0ou (now Tom1 2hafN suggests that it is incorrect to translate a 2hinese%style topic with an +nglish expression such as 0s for. This is because the +nglish expression suggests contrastiveness. 0 statement such as <s for animals" I advocate a conservation policy, implies that animals are being contrasted with something else for which the speaker perhaps does not advocate a conservation policy. 2hafN suggests that the function of topic is to specify some kind of framework of time,location, or individual reference, within which the main statement applies and that B#real$ topics are not so much #what the sentence is about$ as #the frame within which the sentence holds!. :.1.2. In#or'ation tr$"t$re: gi4en an, ne2 The distinction between theme and rheme is speaker%oriented. &t is based on what the speaker wants to announce as his@her starting point and what s@he goes on to say about it. 0 further distinction can be drawn between what is given and what is new in a message. This is a hearer%oriented distinction, based on what part of the message is known to the hearer and what part is new. 7ere again, a message is divided into two segments" one segment conveys information which the speaker regards as already known to the hearer. The other segment conveys the new information that the speaker wishes to convey to the hearer. 8iven information represents the common ground between speaker and hearer and gives the latter a reference point to which s@he can relate new information. &nformation structure is a feature of the context rather than of the language system as such. .ne can only decide what part of a message is new and what part is given within a linguistic or situational context. 0t any point of the communication process, there will have already been established a certain linguistic and non%linguistic environment. This the speaker can draw on in order to relate new information that s@he wants to convey to elements that are already established in the context. The normal, unmarked order is for the speaker to place the given element before the new one. This order has been found to contribute to ease of comprehension and recall and some composition specialists therefore explicitly recommend it to writers. The given%before%new principle influences other se-uencing decisions in language. 8reenbaum and Ouirk posit a principle of en,9#o"$ to account for the tendency to process information Bso as to achieve a linear presentation from low to high information value!. 4ince the new information often needs to be stated more fully than the given (that is, with a longer, Bheavier! structure), it is not unexpected that an organi'ation principle which may be called +F>%H+&87T comes into operation along with the principle of end%focus. The same principle which motivates speakers to place given before new information also motivates them to place longer and heavier structures towards the end of the clause. 4imple verbs without modals or closely linked prepositional phrases are regularly fronted while long and syntactically complex subjects are not. 5roblems arise in translation when a principle such as end%weight or end%focus seems to clash with more basic grammatical principles in the target language. &n +nglish involves placing the subject before the predicate. &n translating from 1ra'ilian 5ortuguese, which allows the fronting of simple verbs, into +nglish, a translator may be tempted to ignore the principle of end%weight in order to preserve the subject%before%predicate arrangement. Ho2 are gi4en an, ne2 igna!e, in ,i "o$r e* &nformation structure is a feature of spoken rather than written +nglish" The information systems are those concerned with the organi'ation of the text into units of information. This is expressed in +nglish by the intonation patterns, and it is therefore a feature only of spoken +nglish. The domain of information structure is not the clause as a grammatical unit but the tone group as a phonological unit. This is reali'ed phonologically as a tone group, with the peak of prominence or tonic accent falling on the new element. Tonic accent falls carries the in#or'ation #o"$ . +nglish speakers to highlight the core of a message. The tonic accent is what we normally perceive as stress. This approach may seem of limited applicability in translation since it appears to rely heavily on phonological evidence. 7alliday explains that the boundaries of given and new elements are undecidable on phonological evidence alone. The tonic accent normally falls on the last item, but this does not tell us where the given element ends and the new one begins. To establish this, we have to look at other evidence in the surrounding context. The importance of context in establishing the boundaries of given and new elements is worth noting because it suggests that analysing written language in terms of given and new is feasible. &n written language, as in spoken language, one can refer to the context to establish whether a piece of information has or has not been introduced earlier. (any of the devices used to signal information status are common to both spoken and written language. For instance, in both spoken and written +nglish definiteness is generally associated with given information and indefiniteness with new information. The girl wal(ed into the room suggests that the identity of the girl has already been established. The use of subordination as a syntactic device for marking given information may be a common feature of information structure in many languages. 1ecause stress is not available in written language, intricate syntactic devices have to be used to perform a similar function. .ne of the most important functions of cleft and pseudo%cleft structures in +nglish is to signal information status. &n cleft structures, the item in theme position is presented as new and the item in rheme position is presented as given. 0part from syntactic structure, punctuation can also be used as a device for signalling information structure in written language. &t is used, for example, to distinguish between a defining relative clause such as He was waving to the girl who was running along the platform and a non%defining relative clause such as He was waving to the girl" who was running along the platform. &n the first example, who was running along the platform. The comma is used to signal that the same clause represents new information. Hhen needed, clear signals of information status can be employed in written language. Translators must develop a sensitivity to the various signalling systems available in the languages they work with. 4peakers usually refer to current given entities with attenuated syntactic and phonological forms!. These comments may well apply to +nglish, and perhaps seven a large number of languages, but they certainly do not apply to all. 5ronominali'ation is rare in apanese. 0lso some languages ( apanese included) use special affixes to mark given and new information or thematic and non%thematic elements. &n some languages, stress and

intonation are not available as devices for signalling new information. They are not available in 2hinese or in French. 2hinese definiteness and indefiniteness are typically signalled by means of word order. Finnish is another language that does not have an article system. &t does not seem to support the attenuation theory. Ho2 i gi4ene ,eter'ine,* Ability to determine when and when not a certain item of information can be treated as given. 0 given element is an element which is recoverable because it has been mentioned before. 1ut information may be treated by the speaker as given for a variety of other reasons. &t may be predictable, or it may be contextually salient. 2hafe suggests that the key to givenness lies in the notion of consciousness" 8iven (or old) information is that knowledge which the speaker assumes to be in the consciousness of the addressee at the time of the utterance. 4o%called new information is what the speaker assumes he is introducing into the addressee!s consciousness by what he says. The fact that the speaker and addressee themselves are regularly treated as given (and pronominali'ed as & and you respectively) stems from the same consideration. The speaker is conscious of the addressee, and the addressee is conscious of the speaker. 7ow long can an element be assumed to remain in the addressee!s consciousnessM under what circumstances would a previously mentioned item have to be re%introduced as newM 2hafe suggests two variables which can be used to determine whether an item may or may not have left the addressee!s consciousness" The number of intervening sentences in which the item was not mentioned is one obvious variable, but more interesting would be the effect of such discourse boundaries as a change of scene, where a whole set of items can be assumed to enter the consciousness of the addressee, presumably pushing out old ones. 8ivenness is assigned by the speaker and, as such, does not necessarily correlate with the reality of the linguistic or extra%linguistic situation. 0 speaker may decide to present an element as given even when there is no sufficient reason to assume that it is in the addressee!s consciousness. This may be done for rhetorical reasons and is a common ploy in politics. 5resenting a piece of information as given suggests that it is already established and agreed and is therefore non%negotiable. 4imilarly, an element which has been mentioned before may be presented as new because it is unexpected or because the speaker wishes to present it in a contrastive light. Mar/e, 4 . $n'ar/e, in#or'ation tr$"t$re &nformation structure is not reali'ed by the se-uencing of elements. &t is reali'ed chiefly by tonicity. &n unmarked information structure, the information focus falls on something other than the theme. &t falls on the whole rheme or part of itG for example, in ohn was appointed 2hairman, the tonic accent will normally fall on 2hairman " )) 6ohn was appointed 4hairman )) . .ther options are available to the speaker, depending on where s@he feels the burden of his@her message lies. For instance, the information focus maybe placed on ohn, and in this case the message will be understood as a statement of who was appointed 2hairman and may imply surprise or contrast" )) 6ohn was appointed 4hairman )). &n written language, marked information structure is often signalled by means of typography or punctuation devices. &talics are used to highlight the elements on which the information focus falls. Mar/e, in#or'ation tr$"t$re an, 'ar/e, r3e'e 7allidayan linguists do not seem to have considered that a rheme can also be marked. There are times when a speaker@writer seems to be deliberately highlighting a rheme by stripping the message of its initial element, that is, the theme. Thematic elements are omitted to foreground a rheme, for example Ma(e resistance impossible(They@These colors M). Full stops are inserted in unexpected places to force the reader to treat certain elements as complete units of information. This is particularly effective in the case of 4onsider them. 0ours" where one automatically gets the two interpretations" >consider them% ?i.e. thin( about them!" >they are yours%"and >4onsider them yours%. 4ince information focus normally falls on the rheme or part of it, and since unmarked information structure involves placing the given element before the new one and unmarked thematic structure involves placing theme before rheme, it is not surprising that theme often coincides with given, and rheme often coincides with new. :.2. T3e Prag$e S"3oo! po ition on in#or'ation #!o2: #$n"tiona! enten"e- per pe"ti4e The 5rague 4chool position on theme@rheme and given@new is -uite distinct from 7alliday!s and results in a significantly different explanation of how these categories are reali'ed in discourse. This approach is generally referred to as #$n"tiona! enten"e per pe"ti4e 7FSP8. 0 functional sentence perspective approach may prove more helpful in explaining the interactional organi'ation of languages other than +nglish, particularly languages with free or relatively free word order. The main premise in F45 theory is that the communicative goals of an interaction cause the structure of a clause or sentence to function in different kinds of perspective. 0 sentence such as ohn has been taken ill has a certain syntactic structure which remains unchanged in different communicative settings. &n context, it will function in a certain kind of perspective, depending on the purpose of communicationG for instance, it may function as a statement of a person!s state of health ( ohn has been taken ill ), as an identification of the person affected ( John has been taken ill), or as an affirmation that the information conveyed is really valid ( ohn has been taken ill). The concepts of theme@rheme and given@new are supplemented in Firbas!model with a non%binary notion that determines which elements are thematic and which are not thematic in a clause. This is the notion of "o''$ni"ati4e ,(na'i '(CD). 3inguistic communication is not a static, but a dynamic phenomenon. 0 property of communication, displayed in the course of the development of the information to be conveyed and consisting in advancing this development. 0 clause consists of different types of elements. 4ome elements lay the foundation on which other elements may convey a message. These foundation%laying elements are context%dependent and constitute the theme. They carry a low degree of 2> because, being context%dependent, they do not play a major role in pushing the communication forward. &f we take the example of ohn has been taken ill (as a statement of ohn!s state of health), the foundation%laying element would be ohn. The remaining elements complete the information and fulfil the communicative purpose of the utterance. These core%constituting elements form the non%theme, are context%independent, and carry a higher degree of 2>. Theme consists of context% dependent and rheme of context%independent items. Firbas! notions of context%dependence@independence are therefore purely linguistic and do not extend to the psychological aspect of communication as 7alliday!s notions do. Firbas explained that the non%theme consists of two elements" the tran ition and the rheme. The transition consists of elements which perform the function of linking the foundation%laying and the core%constituting parts of the clause. The transition may also consist of a link verb such as be or seem, or any verb whose main function is simply to link the foundation%laying and core%constituting elements of a clause. &n The weather is fine, for example, is would normally constitute the transition (assuming the communicative purpose of the utterance is to state what the weather is like).The rheme represents the core of the message and carries the highest degree of 2>. &n 6ohn has been ta(en ill , the rheme is take J ill. &n The weather is fine, the rheme is fine. F45 theory assigns thematic or rhematic status to the verb depending on the context and the semantics of the verb itself. 4emantically, the less of a notional component the verb has, the more naturally it goes with the theme as a foundation%laying element. &n many languages as 0rabic, e-uative sentences such as The weather is fine are verbless. &t is also possible to omit a link verb in +nglish in some contexts. 3ink verbs little or no role in pushing the communication forward and therefore have no rhematic status. Firbas, like 7alliday, acknowledges that a unit of information may consist of a given plus new element, or of just a new element. &n the first case, the given element would be considered thematic and the new element would be considered rhematic. &n the second case, a theme still has to be identified and, for Firbas, this would be the least context%independent element(i.e. the element with the lowest degree of 2>). Firbas! approach to information flow can be summed up as follows. 0 clause consists of two types of elements" foundation%laying@context%dependent elements and core%constituting@context%independent elements. The former have a lower degree of 2> and are always thematic. The latter, however, may be thematic or rhematic. 0 clause may totally consist of context%independent elements and, in this case, the theme will be the element with lowest degree of 2> and the rheme will be the element with the highest degree of 2>. :.2.1. Linear arrange'ent an, t3e'ati" tat$ in FSP F45 theorists do not see theme and rheme as being reali'ed chiefly by their relative positions in the clause. Theme normally precedes rheme. F45 theorists also acknowledge semantic structure and context as factors which further determine the distribution of 2>. 2ommunicative dynamism is therefore assumed to be achieved by the interplay of these three factors" linear modification, semantic structure, and context. 4emantic structure and context Boperate either in the same direction as or counter to! linear modification. 1ut both are hierarchically superior to it. pronouns, being context%dependent, always carry a low degree of 2> irrespective of where they occur in the

I.

clause. 4imilarly, definite expressions would be considered thematic and indefinite expressions rhematic in most contexts. The analysis of clause elements in terms of F45 is clearly a complex business. :.2.2. Linear arrange'ent an, 'ar/e, tr$"t$re in FSP 4ince F45 theorists do not take sentence position as the only criterion for assigning thematic status to clause elements, it follows that two alternative formulations of the same message can have the same thematic analysis. For example, &n 2hina the book received a great deal of publicity and The book received a great deal of publicity in 2hina would be analysed in the same way. &n 2hina would be considered rhematic in both formulations. .ne cannot talk specifically about Bmarked theme! in F45 theory, since assumes that initial position is reserved for theme. F45 theorists do, however, acknowledge that there are marked and unmarked structures in every language. They also attempt to explain the difference in terms of theme@ rheme, though their explanation is somewhat different from 7alliday!s. the nature of interaction suggests that the usual, unmarked order of message segments is that of theme followed by rheme. The organi'ation of a message into a theme J rheme se-uence is therefore the unmarked, ordinary order. 7e further suggested that se-uences which deviate from this ordinary order do occur, and he calleda rhemeKtheme organi'ation of a message the Bpathetic order! (Firbas, :;AP).The pathetic order is marked and its function is to convey emotion of some sort" it may be contrastive or contradictory, for example. &nstead of conveying a message in a straightforward way, the pathetic order allows the speaker to add an emotional layer to it. 0n +nglish clause such as Hell%publici'ed the book was would therefore be considered marked in both 7allidayan and 5rague linguistics. 7owever, a 7allidayan linguist would analyse it as a fronted theme J rheme se-uence, whereas a 5rague linguist would analyse it as a rhemeK theme se-uence. The 7allidayan approach explains it in terms of the fronting of an element to make it thematic. The5rague linguists! approach explains it in terms of reversing the themeK rheme se-uence. For the purposes of translation, what matters is that both types of analysis recogni'e the se-uence as marked. :.2.&. T3e ten ion .et2een 2or, or,er an, "o''$ni"ati4e #$n"tion: a pro.!e' in tran !ation* F45 scholars, restrictions on word order in various languages result in a linear arrangement that may or may not coincide with the interpretative arrangement of an utterance. &n languages with relatively free word order there will be less tension between the re-uirements of syntax and those of communicative function. 2onversely, in languages with relatively fixed word order there will be greater instances of tension between syntax and communicative function. Hord%order patterns fulfill a number of functions in all languages" syntactically, semantically, communicatively. >ifferent languages give different priorities to each of these functions, depending on how fixed their system of word%order is. &n +nglish, the grammatical principle plays the leading role in the hierarchy of word order. Translating between languages with different priorities and different types of syntactic restrictions necessarily involves a great deal of skewing of patterns of information flow. The -uestion is" can translators do anything to minimi'e this skewingM :.2.5. S$gge te, trategie #or 'ini'i+ing !inear ,i !o"ation 3inguists have suggested a variety of strategies for resolving the tension between syntactic and communicative functions in translation and language learning. ;oi"e "3ange 4ubstitution of active for passive or the other way around. ohns notes that the strategy of substituting active for passive raises the problem of supplying a subject for the active clause. 7e rightly points outthat the subject of the active clause must preserve the impersonality we normally associate with passive structures in many +uropean languages. Ergati4e structures may provide a strategy similar to that of voice changein some languages. Ergati4it( involves using the object of a transitive verb as the subject of an intransitive verb. C3ange o# 4er. 2hanging the verb altogether and replacing it with one that has a similar meaning but can be used in a different syntactic configuration. (&n +nglish give)get and li(e)please). No'ina!i+ation 4ome languages allow the order verb J subject. &f the translator wishes to maintain this thematic organi'ation and, at the same time, adhere to an obligatory order of subject J verb in the target language, nominali'ation could probably provide a good strategy in many contexts. Fominali'ation involves replacing a verbal form with a nominal one (e.g. describe I description). E%trapo ition +xtraposition involves changing the position of the entire clause in the sentence by, for instance, embedding a simple clause in a complex sentence. 2left and pseudo%cleft structures, discussed under predicated and identifying themes. The main advantage of extraposition is that it Bprovides an escape to a higher and, in this particular respect, freer level! when word order is relatively fixed at clause level. The above strategies are potentially available for resolving the tension between word order and communicative function. &n practice, syntactic and semantic considerations often override or interact with communicative considerations to produce structures that do not follow the arrangement of the source text. To sum up, a translator cannot always follow the thematic organi'ation of the original. &f at all possible, s@he should make an effort to present the target text from a perspective similar to that of the source text. 1ut certain features of syntactic structure such as restrictions on word order, the principle of end%weight, and the natural phraseology of the target language often mean that the thematic organi'ation of the source text has to be abandoned. Hhat matters at the end of the day is that the target text has some thematic organi'ation of its own, that it reads naturally and smoothly, does not distort the information structure of the original (see Q.:.9 above), and that it preserves, where possible, any special emphasis signaled by marked structures in the original and maintains a coherent point of view as a text in its own right. TEATUAL ECUI;ALENCE: COHESION Co3e ion is the network of lexical, grammatical, and other relations which provide links between various parts of a text. These relations or ties organi'e and, to some extent create a text, for instance by re-uiring the reader to interpret words and expressions by reference to other words and expressions in the surrounding sentences and paragraphs. 2ohesion is a surface relationG it connects together the actual words and expressions that we can see or hear. (odel outlined by 7alliday and 7asan in 4ohesion in -nglish. They identify five main cohesive devices in +nglish" re#eren"e- $. tit$tion- e!!ip i - "on0$n"tion- and !e%i"a! "o3e ion. I.1. Re#eren"e Re#eren"e is traditionally used in semantics for the relationship which holds between a word and what it points to in the real world. &n their model reference is limited here to the relationship of identity which holds between two linguistic expressions. For example, in Mrs Thatcher has resigned. She announced her decision this morning , she points to (rs Thatcher within the textual world itself. The resulting cohesion Blies in the continuity of reference, whereby the same thing enters into the discourse a second time!. The most common reference items in +nglish and a large number of other languages are pronouns. Third%person pronouns are fre-uently used to refer back to an entity which has already been introduced into the discourse. 0part from personal reference, +nglish also uses items such as the, this, and those to establish similar links between expressions in a text. <eference is a device which allows the reader@hearer to trace participants, entities, events. .ne of the most common patterns in +nglish is to mention a participant explicitly in the first instance, by name or title, and then use a pronoun to refer back to the same participant in the immediate context. 0nother type of reference relation which is not strictly textual is that of "o9re#eren"e. Mrs Thatcher The 5rime Minister The Iron Lady Maggie. 2o%reference Bis not strictly a linguistic feature at all but a matter of real%world knowledge!. &t is generally difficult and, for the purposes of translation not particularly helpful, to attempt to draw a line between what is linguistic or textual and what is extralinguistic or situational. There is a continuum of cohesive elements that may be used for referring back to an entity already mentioned in the discourse. This continuum stretches from full repetition at one end of the scale to pronominal reference at the other. +xample" There!s a boy climbing that tree. a. The boy !s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. (repetition)

b. The lad !s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. ( (non(') c. The child !s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. ( $peror,inate) d. The idiot !s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. (genera! 2or,) e. 7e !s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. ( prono'ina! re#eren"e) 5atterns of reference (also known as anap3ora ) can vary considerably both within and across languages. 2allow explains that 7ebrew, unlike +nglish, prefers to use proper names to trace participants through a discourse. 7ebrew is more likely to repeat the participant!s name. 1ra'ilian 5ortuguese generally seems to favour more lexical repetition. 5ortuguese inflects verbs for person and number. Hithout the use of independent pronouns. &n some languages, such as apanese and 2hinese, a totally different pattern seems to be in operation. 5ronouns are hardly ever used and, once a participant is introduced, continuity of reference is signalled by omitting the subjects of following clauses. I.2. S$. tit$tion an, e!!ip i 4ubstitution and ellipsis are grammatical rather than semantic relationships. &n $. tit$tion, an item (or items) is replaced by another item" I li(e movies. <nd I do. $o is a substitute for li(e movies. E!!ip i involves the omission of an item. &n other words, in ellipsis, an item is replaced by nothing. &t does not include every instance in which the hearer or reader has to supply missing information, but only those cases where the grammatical structure itself points to an item or items that can fill the slot in -uestion. +xample" oan brought some carnations, and 2atherine some sweet peas. (ellipted item" brought in second clause). +nglish, like most languages, will generally use whatever means are necessary to reduce ambiguity in tracing participants. The +nglish system makes very few distinctions in terms of number, gender, and verb agreement. 3exical repetition is therefore a much safer option in cases where ambiguity of reference may arise and in contexts which do not tolerate ambiguity in general and ambiguity of reference in particular. &n legal and semi%legal texts, it has become the norm to use lexical repetition even in instances where no ambiguity might result from using pronominal reference. I.&. Con0$n"tion Con0$n"tion in4o!4e the use of formal markers to relate sentences, clauses and paragraphs to each other. The use of conjunction does not instruct the reader to supply missing information either by looking for it elsewhere in the text or by filling structural slots. &nstead, conjunction signals the way the writer wants the reader to relate what is about to be said to what has been said before. 2onjunction expresses one of a small number of general relations. The main relations are" a. a,,iti4e: and, or, also, in addition, furthermore, besides, similarly, likewise, by contrast, for instanceG b. a,4er ati4e" but, yet, however, instead, on the other hand, nevertheless, at any rate, as a matter of factG c. "a$ a!: so, conse-uently, it follows, for, because, under the circumstances, for this reasonG d. te'pora!: then, next, after that, on another occasion, in conclusion, an hour later, finally, at lastG e. "ontin$ati4e " now, of course, well, anyway, surely, after all. First, the same conjunction may be used to signal different relations, depending on the context. 4econd, these relations can be expressed by a variety of meansG the use of a conjunction is not the only device for expressing a temporal or causal relation. Third, conjunctive relations do not just reflect relations between external phenomena, but may also be set up to reflect relations which are internal to the text or communicative situation. There is some uncertainty in the literature as to whether conjunctions which occur within sentences can be considered cohesive, since cohesion is considered by some linguists to be a relation between sentences rather than within sentences. 3anguages vary tremendously in the type of conjunctions they prefer to use as well as the fre-uency with which they use such items. 4ome languages, such as 8erman, tend to express relations through subordination and complex structures. .thers, such as 2hinese and apanese, prefer to use simpler and shorter structures and to mark the relations between these structures explicitly where necessary. 2ompared to 0rabic, +nglish generally prefers to present information in relatively small chunks and to signal the relationship between these chunks in unambiguous ways, using a wide variety of conjunctions to mark semantic relations between clauses, sentences, and paragraphs. 4ome +nglish texts make little or no use of conjunctions. There are often pragmatic reasons for the preference of certain types of conjunction and the fre-uency with which conjunctions are used in general. &n different genres of +nglish some genres are generally Bmore conjunctive! than others and that each genre has its own preferences for certain types of conjunction. <eligion and fiction use more conjunctions than science and journalism. &n science and journalism conjunctions and causal conjunctions are relatively infre-uent. This is partly explained by the high level of assumed shared knowledge in science and by the need to give an impression of objectivity in both genres. <estrictions on space and the need to avoid giving an overt explanation of reported events which risks the danger of legal suits and liability further restrict the use of conjunctions, particularly causal conjunctions, in journalism. The problem with conjunction is that it reflects the rhetoric of a text and controls its interpretation. Hhether a translation conforms to the source%text patterns of cohesion or tries to approximate to target%language patterns will depend in the final analysis on the purpose of the translation and the amount of freedom the translator feels entitled to in rechunking information and@or altering signals of relations between chunks. Hhatever the translator decides to do, every option will have its advantages and disadvantages. 0part from -uestions of naturalness, accuracy, and the Blogic! of a text, there are sometimes stylistic considerations which may make the translation of conjunctions particularly difficult. I.5. Le%i"a! "o3e ion &t refers to the role played by the selection of vocabulary in organi'ing relations within a text. 0 given lexical item cannot be said to have a cohesive function per se (cf. reference, conjunction), but any lexical item can enter into a cohesive relation with other items in a text. 7alliday and 7asan divide lexical cohesion into two main categories" reiteration and "o!!o"ation. Reiteration involves repetition of lexical items. 0 synonym or near%synonym, a superordinate, or a general word. +xample" T3ereG a .o( "!i'.ing t3at tree. a. The boy is going to fall if he doesn!t take care. 7repetition8 b. The lad%s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. 7 (non('8 c. The child%s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. 7 $peror,inate8 d. The idiot%s going to fall if he doesn!t take care. 7genera! 2or,8 Reiteration is not the same as reference because it does not necessarily involve the same identity. Co!!o"ation covers any instance which involves a pair of lexical items that are associated with each other in the language in some way. =arious kinds of oppositeness of meaning" e.g. boy)girl7 love)hate7 order) obey. 0ssociations between pairs of words from the same ordered series" e.g. Tuesday)Thursday7 <ugust)$ecember7 dollar)cent. 0ssociations between pairs of words from unordered lexical sets" e.g. partKwhole relations" car)bra(e7 body)arm7 bicycle)wheel7 partKpart relations" mouth)chin7 verse)chorus7 co%hyponymy" red)green (colour)G chair)table (furniture).0ssociations based on a history of co%occurrence (collocation proper" e.g. rain" pouring" torrential" wet7 hair" comb. .n the contrary, lexical cohesion typically operates through lexical chains (such as socialism" communist" -ast ) that run through a text and are linked to each other in various ways. The notion of lexical cohesion as being dependent on the presence of networks of lexical items rather than the presence of any specific class or type of item is important. &t provides the basis for what 7alliday and 7asancall in tantia! 'eaning. 3exical networks do not only provide cohesion, they also determine collectively the sense in which each individual item is used in a given context. The idea that the meanings of individual lexical items depend on the networks of relations in which they enter with other items in a text is now taken as axiomatic in language studies in general and in translation studies in particular. &n analy'ing a text a translator Bis not concerned with isolating phenomena or items to study them in depth, but with tracing a web of relationships, the importance of individual items being determined by their relevance and function in the text!. Cou simply cannot make any word mean whatever you want it to mean. Hhat this suggests is that as hard as one might try, it is impossible to reproduce networks of lexical cohesion in a target text which are identical to those of the source text. &f you cannot make a word mean what you want it to mean,

you might have to settle for one with a slightly different meaning or different associations. +very time this happens it introduces a subtle (or major) shift away from the lexical chains and associations of the source text. &diom%controlled chains can only be reproduced if the target language has an idiom which is identical to the source idiom in both form and meaning. 0part from the manipulation of idioms, the lack of ready e-uivalents will sometimes re-uire the translator to resort to strategies such as the use of a superordinate, paraphrase, or loan word. These naturally result in producing different lexical chains in the target text. 3ikewise, the grammatical structure of the target language may re-uire the translator to add or delete information and to reword parts of the source text in a variety of ways. 0dmittedly, in non%literary translation new networks of lexical relations created in the target text during the course of translation will often be very close, overall, to those of the source text. 1ut they will still be different and the difference, subtle though it may be, may affect the cohesiveness and coherence of the target text in varying degrees, depending on the skill and experience of the translator. Hhatever lexical and grammatical problems are encountered in translating a text and whatever strategies are used to resolve them, a good translator will make sure that, at the end of the day, the target text displays a sufficient level of lexical cohesion in its own right. 4ubtle changes K and sometimes major changes K are often unavoidable. 1ut what the translator must always avoid is the extreme case of producing what appears to be a random collection of items which do not add up to recogni'able lexical chains that make sense in a given context. 2ohesion contributes to patterns of redundancy and these vary both across languages and across text types. +xplicit markers of cohesion raise the level of redundancy in textG their absence lowers it. There is a general tendency in translation to raise the level of explicitness, increase the level of redundancy in the target text and suggests that Bit might be the case that explicitation is a universal strategy inherent in the process of language mediation, as practiced by language learners, non%professional translators and professional translators alike!.

TEMA 5: INTERLIN?UISTIC INECUI;ALENCE ITEMS IN NON9SPECIALI@ED TEATS

=. PRA?MATIC ECUI;ALENCE He need to get away from the linguistic organi'ation and look at reality, precisely because that reality is encoded in situations and texts for the translator and not in languages. the text cannot be considered as a static specimen of language but essentially as the verbali'ed expression of an author!s intention as understood by the translator as reader, who then recreates this whole for another readership in another culture. 7ow a given text comes to Bmake sense! to a given readership. He will be venturing beyond the textual level of connecting sentences and paragraphs together and identifying various textual features. He will be concerned with the way utterances are used in communicative situations and the way we interpret them in context. 5ragmatics is the study of language in use. &t is the study of meaning as conveyed and manipulated by participants in a communicative situation. =.1. Co3eren"e =.1.1. Co3eren"e 4 . "o3e ion 2oherence is a network of relations which organi'e and create a text" cohesion is the network of surface relations which link words and expressions to other words and expressions in a text, and coherence is the network of conceptual relations which underlie the surface text. 1oth concern the way stretches of language are connected to each other. 2ohesion stretches of language are connected to each other by virtue of lexical and grammatical dependencies. &n the case of coherence, they are connected by virtue of conceptual or meaning dependencies as perceived by language users. 2ohesion is a property of the text and that coherence is a facet of the reader!s evaluation of a text. 2ohesion is objective, capable in principle of automatic recognition, while coherence is subjective and judgments concerning it may vary from reader to reader. The text will not Bcohere! for this particular reader. The mere presence of cohesive markers cannot create a coherent textG cohesive markers have to reflect conceptual relations which make sense. Hhat actually gives texture to a stretch of language is not the presence of cohesive markers but our ability to recogni'e underlying semantic relations which establish continuity of sense. The main value of cohesive markers seems to be that they can be used to facilitate and possibly control the interpretation of underlying semantic relations. =.1.2. I "o3eren"e a #eat$re o# te%t or it$ation* The ability to make sense of a stretch of language depends on the hearer!s or reader!s expectations and experience of the world. >ifferent societies, and indeed different individuals and groups of individuals within the same society, have different experiences of the world and different views on the way events and situations are organi'ed or related to each other. 0 network of relations which is valid and makes sense in one society may not be valid in another. This is not just a -uestion of agreeing or disagreeing with a certain view of the world but of being able to make sense of it in the first place. Hhether a text is judged as acceptable or not does not depend on how closely it corresponds to some state of affairs in the world, but rather on whether the reader finds the presented version of reality believable, homogeneous, or relevant. The coherence of a text is a result of the interaction between knowledge presented in the text and the reader!s own knowledge and experience of the world, the latter being influenced by a variety of factors such as age, sex, race, nationality, education, occupation, and political and religious affiliations. Texts are neither coherent nor incoherent by themselves. 0 text which coheres for one reader may therefore not cohere for another. >ifferent linguists have different views that meaning is a property of a text or a property of a communicative situation involving participants and settings in addition to a text. Hhether one holds the view that meaning exists in text or in situations involving text in addition to other variables such as participants and settings, one cannot deny that a reader!s cultural and intellectual background determine how much sense s@he gets out of a text. 0 reader can only make sense of a text by analy'ing the linguistic elements which constitute it against the backdrop of his@her own knowledge and experience. <egardless of whether meaning is a property of text or situation, coherence is not a feature of text as such but of the judgement made by a reader on a text. 0s far as translation is concerned, this means that the range and type of difficulties encountered will not so much depend on the source text itself as Bon the significance of the translated text for its readers as members of a certain culture, or of a sub%group within that culture, with the constellation of knowledge, judgement and perception they have developed from it!. Hriters will word their messages differently depending on the nature of the audience they have in mind, whether it consists of adults or children, specialists or non%specialists, and so on. 0 translator has to take account of the range of knowledge available to his@her target readers and of the expectations they are likely to have about such things as the organi'ation of the world, the organi'ation of language in general, the organi'ation and conventions of particular text types, the structure of social relations, and the appropriateness or inappropriateness of certain kinds of linguistic and non%linguistic behaviour, among other things. =.2. Co3eren"e an, pro"e e o# interpretation: i'p!i"at$re 2harolles suggests that a reader may see a certain continuity of sense between parts of an utterance and still fail to understand it fully. For instance" @I went to the cinema. The beer was goodA. This is perfectly coherent, if decontextuali'ed, piece of language. 2harolles explains that anyone who hears or reads it will reach the following interpretation" the speaker says that s@he went to the cinema, that s@he drank beer at the cinema, and that the beer in -uestion was good. There is nothing in the above utterance which tells us explicitly that the speaker drank the beer or that s@he did so at the cinema. This type of minimal coherence $pp!e'enta! "o3eren"e. There is another type of coherence, e%p!anator( "o3eren"e, not only establishes continuity, also *ustifies it. +xplanatory coherence is achieved when one can reach an interpretation such as this" the speaker says s@he went to the cinema. The film s@he saw was bad K so bad that the only good thing s@he can find to say about it is that the beer s@he drank there was good. 7ow do we achieve explanatory coherenceM i'p!i"at$re E the -uestion of how it is that we come to understand more than is actually said. 8rice uses the term i'p!i"at$re to refer to what the speaker means or implies rather than what s@he literally says. &mplicature is not to be confused with non%literal meaning, for instance with idiomatic meaning, with idiomatic meaning. +xample" 0. 4hall we go for a walkM 1. &t!s raining.

8rice suggests that a speaker can signal an implied meaning conventionally or non%conventionally. To signal an implied meaning conventionally, a speaker uses the textual resources which are conventionally understood to signal certain relationships between propositions. 2onjunctions such as therefore, because, and in spite of are one such textual resource. 8rammatical structure is another. For instance, in B&t!s money that they want! the grammatical structure itself conventionally presupposes what is expressed in the subordinate clause, in this case Bthey want something!. 8rice!s preoccupation with speech means that his views are sometimes difficult to relate to written communication. 8rice!s views do have important applications in translation. 8rice suggests that discourse has certain important features" for instance, it is connected" it has a purposeG and it is a co%operative effort. 8eneral principle of communication, the Co9operati4e Prin"ip!e. &mplied meaning which is not signalled conventially derives from the 2o%operative 5rinciple and a number of maxims associated with it" Ouantity, Ouality, <elevance and (anner" :.Ouantity (a.) (ake your contribution as informative as is re-uired (b.) >o not make your contribution more informative than is re-uired. 9. Ouality. Try to make your contribution one that is true!, specifically" (a.) >o not say what you believe to be false. (b.) >o not say that for which you lack ade-uate evidence. ?. <elevance. (ake your contributions relevant to the current exchange. P.(anner. 1e perspicuous, specifically" (a.) 0void obscurity of expression. (b.) 0void ambiguity. (c.) 1e brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity). (d.) 1e orderly. He can and do refuse to adhere to the maxims in some situations" a participant may try to avoid adhering to one or more of the maxims in order to evade a topic or -uestion. .ften in political interviews. 2onversational maxims and the implicatures that result from observing or flouting them are adapted to serve the purpose of the communication in hand. This purpose will vary according to the situation and participants. For example" -li3abeth is putting on a lot of weight. She smo(es very heavily. = e will naturally strive to relate the two propositions somehow. He may infer that the speaker implies that +li'abeth is putting on a lot of weight because she is smoking too heavily, or the other way round" that she is smoking too heavily because she is putting on a lot of weight, perhaps as a way of controlling her appetite. 5ragmatic inferences of this type are essential to maintaining the coherence of discourse. Hhich inferences we do draw will depend on a variety of factors such as our knowledge of the world, of such things as the relationship between smoking, appetite, and weightG our knowledge of participants in the discourse, of the speaker, and of +li'abethG our knowledge of and fluency in the specific language being used, and so on. &mplicatures are pragmatic inferences which allow us to achieve something like 2harolles! explanatory coherence. 0part from observing the maxims, a language user can deliberately flout a maxim and in doing so produce what 8rice calls a "on4er ationa! i'p!i"at$re. For instance, if used as a genuine -uestion the utterance $o you (now what time it is1 3evinson calls this type of meaning a tan,ar, i'p!i"at$re. &f the same utterance is used as a rhetorical -uestion, in the right context and with the appropriate intonation, it could convey a meaning such as BCou are very late!. This is what 8rice would call a "on4er ationa! i'p!i"at$re. &t is achieved by flouting the maxim of Ouality which demands sincerity. 2onversational implicatures are often indeterminate. For another, an utterance may be open to several possible interpretations. This may or may not be intentional on the part of the speaker. &n either case, it complicates the task of the translator who may knowingly or unknowingly eliminate certain possible interpretations of the original from the target text. 4@he may even inadvertently give rise to other interpretations which are not derivable from the original text. 8rice details a number of factors which can contribute to our success or failure in working out implicatures. These are" :.the conventional meaning of the words and structures used (i.e. a mastery of the language system), together with the identity of any references that may be involvedG 9.the 2o%operative 5rinciple and its maximsG ?.the context, linguistic or otherwise, of the utteranceG P.other items of background knowledgeG and Q.the fact (or supposed fact) that all relevant items falling under the previous headings are available to both participants and both participants know or assume this to be the case. =.&. Co3eren"e- i'p!i"at$re- an, tran !ation trategie 7ow these factors might relate not only to working out implicatures but to the -uestion of coherence in general and to common problems and strategies in translation. =.&.1. T3e "on4entiona! 'eaning o# 2or, an, tr$"t$re an, t3e i,entit( o# re#eren"e =.&.1.1.T3e "on4entiona! 'eaning o# 2or, an, tr$"t$re &f we do not understand the meanings of the words and structures used in a text, we cannot work out its implied meanings. 6nowledge of the language system may not be sufficient but it is essential if one is to understand what is going on in any kind of verbal communication. This means that any mistranslation of words and structures in the source text may well affect the calculability of implicatures in the target text. &n every language there will be conventional associations between certain linguistic patterns and certain inferable meanings. These patterns are identifiable and are sometimes recorded in grammars. They are not necessarily associated with the same range of meanings in other languages. How can you be so cruel1 (instead of B0ou are very cruel%). Fixed expressions modelled on rhetorical -uestions are often ironic. &n +nglish, the use of inverted commas around a word or expression in the body of a text can suggest a range of implied meanings. &t can suggest disagreement with the way a word or expression is used, emphasis, irony, or tentativeness about the appropriateness or applicability of an expression. 5roblems arise in translation when the function of such patterns is not recogni'ed and a literal or near%literal transfer of form distorts the original implicature or conveys a different one. =.&.1.2.T3e i,entit( o# an( re#eren"e t3at 'a( .e in4o!4e, The ability to identify references to participants and entities is essential for drawing inferences and for maintaining the coherence of a text. 0 proper name or even a reference which is unknown to the reader can disrupt the continuity of the text and obscure the relevance of any statement associated with it. +xample" 0rsene 3upin (0 French version of 1oris 6arloff). 0rsene 3upin has very little in common with 1oris 6arloff. The former is the hero of a series of French detective%type stories. The latter is a 1ritish actor associated mainly with horror films. &dentifying reference is not just a -uestion of identifying roughly who or what the referent is but, crucially, of knowing enough about the referent to interpret the particular associations it is meant to trigger in our minds in a given context. <eferents are not featureless beings and entitiesG they have specific histories, physical and social features, and are associated with particular contexts. &t is the ability to interpret the significance of a given reference and the way it links with other features of the context and co%text that contributes to the continuity of sense or coherence of a text and enables us to draw any intended implicatures. =.&.2. T3e Cooperati4e Prin"ip!e an, it 'a%i' They are not arbitrary but are a feature of any rational behaviour, be it linguistic or non%linguistic. Ouantity. <elevance. The 2o%operative 5rinciple and its maxims are universal, on the assumption that linguistic behaviour is just one type of rational behaviour and that all human beings are rational. 1ible translators" their suspicion and to consider the possibility that the 2o%operative 5rinciple and its maxims are not universal. Thomson" a certain type of implicature, say -uality implicature, is never used by

the speakers of a particular language, or that the contexts in which a type of implicature will be used will differ from one language community to the next. +ven within the same cultural and linguistic community, there are sometimes special contexts in which one or more of the maxims do not apply. There is also the -uestion of whether the list of maxims proposed by 8rice is exhaustive and whether the maxims have the same value in different cultures. 8rice himself conceded that the four maxims do not represent an exhaustive list and suggested that other maxims such as B1e polite! may be added. &n some cultures, B1e polite! indeed seems to override all other maxims. #Fo$ almost constitutes a term of abuse in apanese and e-uivocation. The maxims of Ouality and (anner are easily overriden by considerations of politeness in some cultures. &t certainly seems to cause cross%cultural difficulties. 5oliteness is a relativistic notion and different cultures therefore have different norms of Bpolite! behaviour. They also have different ideas about what is and what is not a Btaboo! area. 4ex, religion, and defecation are taboo subjects in many societies, but not necessarily to the same degree within similar situations. &n some translation contexts, being polite can be far more important than being accurate. 0 translator may decide to omit or replace whole stretches of text which violate the reader!s expectations of how a taboo subject should be handled K if at all K in order to avoid giving offence. The 1ible apparently gives far too much information. 0n important factor which seems to override 8rice!s maxims and support the possibility that they are both language% and culture%specific relates to norms of discourse organi'ation and rhetorical functions in different languages. 0rabic is well known to use repetition as a major rhetorical device. The same information is repeated again and again in a variety of ways in an effort to convince by assertion. This style of argumentative prose is seen by non%0rabs as too verbose and certainly anything but brief. >ifferent rhetorical conventions are therefore seen to apply in different cultures and they can override a maxim such as B1e brief or B1e relevant!. 8rice!s notion of implicature is extremely useful to anyone engaged in cross%cultural communication, but it cannot be taken at face value. The maxims on which the 2o%operative 5rinciple is based have rightly been critici'ed as vague and ill%defined by various linguists. 4perber and Hilson, for instance, suggest that Bappeals to the #maxim of relation$ are no more than dressed%up appeals to intuition!. 8rice!s maxims seem to reflect directly notions which are known to be valued in the +nglish%speaking world, for instance sincerity, brevity, and relevance. These do not necessarily have the same value in other cultures, nor should they be expected to represent any ideal basis for communication. the interpretation of a maxim or the maxims themselves may differ from one linguistic community to another, but the process of conveying intended meaning by means of exploiting whatever maxims are in operation in that community will be the same. =.&.&. T3e "onte%t- !ing$i ti" or ot3er2i e- o# t3e $tteran"e The context in which an utterance occurs determines the range of implicatures that may sensibly be derived from it. 0part from the actual setting and the participants involved in an exchange, the context also includes the co%text and the linguistic conventions of a community in general. The inability to relate a piece of information to his@her own context can lead the reader to draw the wrong inferences from a text. The context also includes certain strategies that people regularly employ in order to impose some kind of structure on the world around them. 3evinson relates the -uestion of normal ordering of events in the real world to the sub%maxim of (anner, B1e orderly!. 7e suggests that it is because we expect participants in a discourse to respect the maxim B1e orderly! that we expect them to recount events in the order in which they happened. &t is generally conceded that it is impossible to determine exactly what Bnatural orders! there are in different types of discourse and in different languages, though one intuitively knows when a deviant order is being used. 5art of the problem is that the ordering of events and entities may be adapted to maintain point of view or thematic progression for instance. .rdering strategies may also be influenced by physical or emotional factors. &t is normal to expect entities which are closer to one!s own environment to be mentioned first in a list. 0nother point" Bcontext! is the language user!s sense of what is socially and textually appropriate or normal. This does not have much to do with what the reader thinks the world is like, but rather with what s@he is prepared to accept as an appropriate behaviour (linguistic or otherwise) in a given situation. This Bsense of appropriateness! could provide the context for interpreting the additional maxim B1e polite!. 0ppropriateness is not restricted to the notion of politenessG it covers a multitude of other things. For instance, the use of the apanese calendar. 0s far as the apanese reader is concerned, it is acceptable to use the western calendar in texts which relate directly to the western world. 7owever, texts which deal with topics that are closer to home, such as apanese heritage or history, are expected to use the apanese calendar. 0n interesting area in which a translator needs to be particularly sensitive to the reader!s expectations in a given context concerns modes of address. &t includes the use of appropriate personal and occupational titles, various combinations of first names and surnames, title and surname, or title and first name, the use of nicknames, and even the use of terms of affection such as dear or darling. Fot all contexts in which modes of address are used will involve deliberate violation of socio%cultural norms to convey implicatures. 0s long as the translator is aware that the norms of the target language will not necessarily match those of the source language, an appropriate adjustment in the target text should solve the problem and avoid conveying unintended implicatures. &n +nglish, for instance, a common and acceptable form of address in a formal context such as a business letter consists of title plus surname, for example" Mr Brown" Mrs Beith" $r Belly. This would normally be replaced in 0rabic by a combination of title plus first name or title plus full name. Translators often make adjustments in this area to conform to their readers! expectations. =.&.5. Ot3er ite' o# .a"/gro$n, /no2!e,ge &n order to make sense of any piece of information presented in a text, the reader@hearer has to be able to integrate it into some model of the world, whether real or fictional. Text%presented information can only make sense if it can be related to other information we already have. 0 text may confirm, contradict, modify, or extend what we know about the world, as long as it relates to it in some way. There is a great deal of overlap between identifying reference and accessing relevant background information. Hhether a translator decides to explain a reference or not depends on whether the target reader is assumed to be familiar with it and the extent to which the translator feels inclined to intervene. 0s well as expanding a text to provide the necessary background information, a translator may decide to delete information that the target readership can be assumed to be familiar with. Hhat happens when the translator anticipates a serious clash between assumed and actual background knowledge of the reader. Hhat is involved here is the difficulty of dealing with a vast gap between source and target cultures! versions of the world. =.&.:. T3e a4ai!a.i!it( o# a!! re!e4ant ite' #a!!ing $n,er t3e pre4io$ 3ea,ing The final factor on 8rice!s list of Bdata! in Bthe fact that all relevant items falling under the previous headings are available to both participants and both participants know or assume this to be the case!. &n order to convey an intended meaning, the speaker@writer must be able to assume that the hearer@reader has access to all the necessary background information, features of the context, etc. and that it is well within his@her competence to work out any intended implicatures. The less the writer assumes that the reader has access to the more s@he will provide in the way of explanation and detail. Translators often find themselves in the position of having to reassess what is and what is not available to target readers to ensure that implicatures can be worked out. 0part from filling gaps in the reader!s knowledge, there is also the -uestion of the reader!s expectations. &n translation, anything that is likely to violate the target reader!s expectations must be carefully examined and, if necessary, adjusted in order to avoid conveying the wrong implicatures or even failing to make sense altogether. /nless motivated, a deviant configuration at any linguistic level may block a participant!s access to Bthe conventional meaning of the words and structures used!, and can directly affect the coherence of a text. The main function of linguistic elements and patterning is to organi'e the content of a message so that it is easily accessible to a reader or hearer. 0ny disturbance to the normal organi'ational patterns of language must therefore be motivated, otherwise the reader will not be able to make sense of it. (ost professional translators appreciate the need to fulfil a reader!s expectations about the organi'ation of the target language in order to maintain the coherence of a text and avoid giving rise to unwanted implicatures. 7owever, there are instances in which deviation from normal patterning is a feature of the source text itself. &f deviation is motivated and if it is necessary for working out an intended meaning, the translator may well decide to transfer it to the target text. 0s discussed above, readers! expectations do not necessarily have to be fulfilled. Hriters, and translators, often appeal to their readers to modify their expectations if such modifications are re-uired in a given context. He are normally prepared to accept a great deal of unusual and even bi'arre linguistic behaviour provided it can be justified, for instance on the basis of poetic creativity or humour. >eviations from normal patterning have to be motivated implies that they have to occur in a context that is Binterpretable !by the hearer@reader. +xample" conversation are all non%native speakers of +nglish. The conversation is conducted partly in +nglish and partly in

J.

7indi. The speakers, particularly (ohamed Fayed, have a rather poor command of +nglish. The problem that the 0rab translator faces in rendering this text into 0rabic is that (ohamed Fayed is +gyptianG his first language is 0rabic. To adjust Fayed!s speech to reflect normal patterns of 0rabic would considerably weaken the carefully structured argument put forward by Tiny <owland, the Bjilted suitor! who wants to show that Fayed is unworthy of the privilege of owning the 7ouse of Fraser and incapable of running such a prestigious 1ritish concern. The translator decides to compromise by transferring the deviant organi'ation into 0rabic in order to convey something of the Bstupid foreigner! image of Fayed, while, at the same time, explaining the situation to the reader so that s@he can make sense of it. +xample" Footnote. 2oherence is a very problematic and elusive notion because of the diversity of factors, linguistic and non%linguistic, which can affect it and the varying degrees of importance which a particular factor can assume in a given context. +ven a single lexical item, if mistranslated, can affect the way a text coheres. 0 polysemous item in the source text will rarely have an e-uivalent with the same range of meanings in the target language. &n order to maintain coherence translators often have to minimi'e discrepancies between the model of the world presented in the source text and that with which the target reader is likely to be familiar. The more harmony is assumed to exist between the model of the world presented in the source text and the target culture!s version of the world, the more inclined the translator will be to remain invisible. The main difficulties seem to be concerned with the ability to assess the target readers! range of knowledge and assumptions about various aspects of the world, and to strike a reasonable balance between, on the one hand, fulfilling their expectations and, on the other hand, maintaining their interest in the communication by offering them new or alternative insights. Bthe principles of analogy (things will tend to be as they were before) and local interpretation (if there is a change, assume it is minimal) form the basis of the assumption of coherence in our experience of life in general, hence in our experience of discourse as well!. This is true, but we must also remember that readers in general, and readers of translated texts in particular, are prepared to accept a great deal of change and a view of the world which is radically different from their own, provided they have a reason for doing so and are prepared for it. &n attempting to fill gaps in their readers! knowledge and fulfil their expectations of what is normal or acceptable, translators should be careful not to Boverdo! things by explaining too much and leaving the reader with nothing to do. 1EYOND ECUI;ALENCE: ETHICS AND MORALITY +thical choices and dilemmas that translators and interpreters often encounter and for which they are rarely prepared. .f central concern is the need to develop critical skills that can enable translators and interpreters to make ethical decisions for themselves, rather than have to fall back uncritically on abstract codes drawn up by their employers or the associations that represent them. This is important for at least three reasons. The first is that no code can ever predict the full range of concrete ethical issues that may arise in the course of professional practice, and hence translators % like other professionals % are often faced with situations in which it is difficult to interpret or apply the relevant code. 4econd, codes, like laws, are elaborated by people like us and are therefore never infallible, ethically or otherwise. &t is your responsibility to -uestion the code in order to avoid causing harm to others or perpetuating potential forms of injustice, 0nd finally, it is in the interest of society as a whole for individuals to be accountable for their decisions, in professional life as elsewhere. J.1. Et3i" an, 'ora!it( +thics and morality are generally understood to concern our ability to make decisions in the basis of what we believe to be morally right or wrong in a specific context. ;irt$e et3i" . Hhat kind of translator should & beM =irtue ethics takes a long view of ethical issues, framing them not as merely momentary or episodic concerns but rather as issues relevant across all domains of life and one!s entire lifespan. +thics is thus understood as a lifelong process of learning and improvement, of nurturing the right virtues in ourselves and those in our care. 1ut the two issues are clearly inseparable, since in striving to be a better person an individual must reflect on the same principles and ideals that inform his or her decision about what is ethical to do in a specific context. The decision we take on any given occasion is generally judged as ethical or unethical to the extent that it affects others. /nethical behaviour thus causes harm to others. 7owever, as is evident, the distinction between the self and others in never straightforward. >iscussion of ethics revolve around #dry, abstract$ principles that re negatively formulated in the form of #don!ts rather than dos$, while morality concerns everyday decisions, features prominently in public debates about the rights and wrongs of specific events, and therefore seems more relevant to our lives. +thics is collective, involves conscious elaboration of codes and principles that constrain the behaviour of those obliged to abide by them, and is increasingly associated with professional and institutional contexts. (any default choices that do not necessarily give rise to conscious decision%making can have important ethical implications. How do we decide what is ethical? 1road distinction between teleological and deontological approaches to the issue of ethical decision%making >eontological models define what is ethical by reference to what is right in and of itself, irrespective of conse-uences, and are rule%based.R 6antian ethics basis of principles such as duty, loyalty or respect for human dignityG hence" Rl refrain from intervening because it is my duty as a translator to remain impartialR, orR intervene where necessary because it is the duty of a responsible interpreter to empower the deaf participantR. Teleological approaches, define what is ethical by reference to what produces the best results. /tilitarianism is a teleological theory that is more concerned with conse-uences than with what is morally right per se. R(aking a conscious effort to remain impartial can help avoid emotional involvement and possible burn%outR. The distinction between deontological and teleological approaches cuts across the various models of ethics. The issue of why we opt for one decision rather than another is just as important as what decision we opt for. The arguments we use, like the specific linguistic choices we make (whether we call someone disabled or a cripple" for instance), are not without their own conse-uences. Hhat is moral is a matter of opinion. This type of relativism can take various forms, 4ome relativists suggest that what is moral varies from one society to another and at different points in history, and that we must therefore refrain from judging others on the basis of our own, current values. >ifferent communities have different cultural beliefs, and that tolerance re-uires us to accept their way of life and expect them to accept ours, 1y this argument, societies that deny women access to education, for instance, would simply be abiding by a different moral code that we must not judge as wrong by our own values. 4ome relativists insist that each individual has his or her own set of moral values, and that no individual is in a position to judge the moral claims of another. opposite extreme from any deontological model. 1ut they are not teleological either, since they refrain from defining what is ethical for anyone other than the agent. (artin 3uther 6ing, 8handi, (andela are good examples of individuals whose legacies challenge extreme relativism. &n practice relativism is a comfortable doctrine to hold on to only when the issue in -uestion does not touch an aspect of our lives that really matters to us. Fevertheless, cultural relativism has many followers, and its main argument has a certain appeal in the context of translation and interpreting in particular, since it supports tolerance and cultural diversity. Hhat is deemed controversial, and hence re-uires more sensitivity from a translator or interpreter to communicate, varies from one social environment to another. The extent to which one can challenge the values and expectations of readers and still maintain their involvement and treat them with dignity is an issue that occupies the minds of many translators and influences their choice of wording as well as what to include and what to omit, often with the involvement of their commissioner or other parties in the interaction. He must remember that morality is not the same as good manners or socially approved habits. lf translators are to behave in an ethically responsible manner, their decisions must be informed by principles that take account of the impact of their actions on others, principles such as Rdo no harmR or Rdo not ac-uiesce in injusticeR, irrespective of the prevailing moral code and social norms of the source or target culture, /niversalists believe that such basic moral principles do exist and that they apply universally, but the way we interpret them can vary from one context to another. <easonable balance between pure, unbridled relativism and rigid, intolerant forms of morali'ing. 1ut this deontological approach does not solve all problems, partly because there is no general agreement about the set of relevant principles and partly because the principles often clash in real life. 2ausing no harm to one person can result in causing harm to another. 2onse-uentialist theories, the best known among which is utilitarianism, bypass the issue of principles and their variation across cultures by assessing moral conduct purely on the basis of a cost%benefit analysis of the conse-uences of an action or behaviour. +goists and 0ltruists. 0 middle course between the two, utilitarianism considers an action moral to the extent that its conse-uences are favourable for everyone, including the agent. Two versions" act%utilitarianism and rule%utilitarianism. 0ct%utilitarianists argue that an ethical decision is one that results in the most favourable conse-uences for the largest number of people in a given context. ln translation, act%utilitarian logic would support a decision that results in the largest number of participants, including the translator, achieving their objectives on a given occasion. This statement is not straightforward and can be interpreted in a variety of ways. rule%utilitarianism, which considers that Rthe right action is that action which is performed in accordance with a rule, or set of rules, the following of which maximi'es utility. The ethical dilemmas that can lead many to adopt utilitarian decisions are brought to life vividly in 6haled 7osseiniRs bestselling novel, The Bite .unner. .ne of the weaknesses of utilitarianism is that it does not take account of emotional factors, which

come into play strongly when one or more of those who may be negatively affected by a difficult decision are very close to the agent" few people would in practice be able to sacrifice their son or daughter to save others, whatever the outcome of an abstract cost%benefit analysis. some argue that 6antian ethics is a better option than both utilitarianism and universalism. 6antian ethics maintains that actions are right or wrong in and of themselves, irrespective of their conse-uences and of contextual considerations. 6antian ethics maintains that our actions must ultimately be motivated by a sense of duty. 4uch is our duty to tell the truth at all times, because it is a necessary part of our duty to treat others with respect and dignity. Treating others with dignity means respecting their autonomy by allowing them access to all the information they need to make decisions that affect their lives and well%being. 6antian ethics falls short of offering us satisfying solutions in some situations which we might experience as morally taxing. lt also does not reflect the way people often behave intuitively. Hhether we think the interpreterRs behaviour is ethical or not will depend on at least two considerations, First, what we believe is &ikely to be the best outcome for all participants (both short term and long term), if we follow utilitarian logic. 4econd, whether we think the fatherRs behaviour is guided by different norms and expectations operative in his own cultural setting, where perhaps calling someone a fool to express dissatisfaction does not carry the same weight as it does in the 2anadian context. 0s >onovan argues, conference interpretersR (and translatorsR) insistence on Rprofessional neutrality and confidentiality as the pillars of their professional codes of practiceR is at least partly motivated by the fact that Rthis position protects them from awkward and even threatening criticism and deflects potential pressure from powerful clientsR. 0 good example in the :;); +nglish translation of (iran 6underaRs The 6o(e, in which the chapters of the book are reordered to reflect the chronological development of the plot, even though 6undera had specifically opted for a different order in the original. 6undera!s subse-uent outrage, expressed in a letter published, is understandable in ethical terms on the basis that he remains a key participant in any interaction that involves a text which still bears his name, and as such is entitled to be%treated with dignity and respect" his consent should have been sought for such a major form of intervention. J.2. Pro#e iona!i '- "o,e o# et3i" an, t3e !a2 &n principle, professional codes can K and should% have a positive impact on the community to which they apply, and cannot be dismissed as irrelevant unless they prove to be out of touch with the realities of practice and with the moral outlook of practitioners. The term #professional$ can have negative ethical implications, and may be used simply to constrain behaviour, to the detriment of moral standards in society. ethics and the law are distinctR, and while one hopes that Rethical norms will inform the content and enforcement of the lawR, we know that many laws have been used in the past and continue to be used today to discriminate against certain minorities, including women in some societies and blacks in many countries in the past, and to assist in various forms of colonial violence. Horld (edical 0ssociation" Ra doctorRs or investigatorRs conscience and duty of care must transcend national lawsR. 4ome scholars have recently warned against Rrestricting the notion of ethics in translation to -uestions ... SofT contractual or legal obligations related to terms of employmentR because it turns translators into unthinking cogs in the wheel of an established social system rather than reflective and ethically responsible citi'ens. For scholars and practitioners, professional codes of translation and interpreting are and must remain the reference point for ethical behaviour in the field. 4ome have argued that Rthe code applies to the interpreted encounter, and not to any interactions before or after the professional encounterR. Thus, the principle of confidentiality, which is central to all professional codes of interpreting and translation, does not necessarily have to apply when a patient tells an interpreter in the waiting room of a clinic that he or she intends to commit suicide but does not wish this to be revealed to the doctor. The interpreter has to use his or her own judgement or appeal to some other code, perhaps the medical code, to resolve this dilemma. Hhen translators and interpreters are faced with serious ethical dilemmas, within or around the encounter proper, one way in which they might attempt to negotiate the need to abide by professional and legal codes on the one hand, and to act ethically on the other, is to reinterpret the key terms of the code. &nterpreters must not allow their personal opinions or feelings to interfere with their workG if necessary, they can always declare a conflict of interest and decline the job. >uring a &unch discussion, a 1ra'ilian participant began to justify the assassination of street children by paramilitaries, The interpreter, taken aback, introduced her rendition with #the speaker seems to be saying that,$ thus distancing herself doubly from the content, This is a clear and deliberate break with standard practice. Thus, by using the third person the interpreter indicates disapproval and in effect comments on the speaker!s remarks ,, This would generally be perceived as an unethical rendition by the standards of professional practice. &mpartiality can be interpreted in different ways % by translators interpreters and by other parties involved in the encounter or those who are in position to comment on their behaviourR. J.&. T3e et3i"a! i'p!i"ation o# !ing$i ti" "3oi"e .ne of the principle%s included in most codes ethics, and like impartially and confidentiality can be difficult to adhere to for ethical reasons, 1ut accuracy focuses specifically on the relationship between the source and target text, or source and target utterance in the case of interpretingR. 0ltering the tenor the tenor of the source text entails a certain disrespect for the autonomy of others involved in the encounter. ln 6antian terms, we would have to acknowledge that the author has a right to express his own world view, and the reader has a right to access and judge that world view for him or herself. /nfortunately, many contexts of translation do not afford translators the opportunity to include footnotes or even prefaces in which they might comment on unsavoury aspects of a source text that they wish to dissociate themselves from. 4ome translators might attempt to resolve the dilemma by declining the assignment altogether. This option is available in principle to free%lance translators, but a staff translator cannot normally refuse to translate texts that raise ethical issues for him or her. The -uestion of whether the wording we use in a translation is semantically #accurate$ in relation to the source text. The choice of a particular dialect idiolect or register with which to render the speech of a character in the source text R or the defendant in a courtroom is potentially an ethical choice, one that has an impact on the way our readers or hearers will perceive the character in -uestion (and conse-uently the community he or she represents), the veracity of a defendant!s testimony, the reliability of a witnessRs statement, the credibility of an asylum seeker!s account of his or her persecution. >eciding how to represent the speech of a character in another language, whether this character is fictional or real, we have to consider not only the semantics and aesthetics of the source and target utterances but also the values and attitudes we attribute to these characters and their communities through the choice we make. >o our choices make the character appear more or less intelligent than we might reasonably assume they are or than they appear to their own communitiesM >ifferent translators will want to draw the line at different points of the continuum between rigid adherence to the semantics of an utterance and active intervention in reformulating a character!s speech to enhance their chances of being taken seriously or treated with empathy in the target context. These observations are as pertinent to the translation (and interpreting) of political figures in the news and defendants and witnesses in the court as they are to literary characters in a novel. J.5. Con"!$,ing re'ar/ Translation and interpreting as diverse, challenging, exciting aid highly conse-uential activities, whether undertaken for great literary writers or destitute immigrants, whether awarded with glamorous literary pri'es or treated as run%of%the%mill, everyday jobs.

TEMA :: CONTRASTI;E ANALYSIS OF NON9SPECIALI@ED TEATS

&.2. TRANSLATION STRATE?IES To avoid using literal translation, we can use a series of strategies whenever we encounter a specific translation problem and we do not want to translate it literally. &n some cases, we use them automatically. &n order to provide an overview of the most useful translation strategies, we must consider the following categori'ation" 1orro2ing 7or "a!D$e8 taking words directly into the T3. 4ometimes they pass into general usage, like software or reggae. The main reason of using it is when the T3 has no obvious e-uivalent for the word or expression we are trying to translate. Tran po ition mechanical process where parts of speech change structures when they are translated. This is fre-uently because grammatical structures are rarely the same in different languages. For instance, the passive voice in +nglish is very commonly used, while translated into 4panish, transposition often needs to be used to change it into a non%passive structure, since it is a much less common structure in this language. Mo,$!ation more abstract than transposition. &t consists of using a phrase that is different in the 43 and T3 to convey the same idea. There is a slight change in form and in concept. For example, shall be subject (UdeberVn cumplirW). Re#or'$!ation used to express something in a completely different way, for example, when translating idioms or culture related items. This process needs to be somewhat creative. For instance, a true and a fair view (Cuna vision a*ustada a la realidad W). Co'pen ation used when something cannot be directly translated from the 43 to the T3, and the meaning that is lost is compensated for somewhere else in the TT, normally including something that is not in the 4T, like the use of UustedW in 4panish must be compensated using other polite and formal markers in +nglish. E%pan ion used when a word or phrase cannot be clearly understood in the TT, unless it is explained or paraphrased somewhat further. For example, UC(20W can be translated as Uuna famosa asociaciXn cristiana para jXvenesW. Ne$tra!i+ation simplification, omission" sometimes there are things that need not be translated, so we neutrali'e or simplify part of the 4T phrase or expression. ED$i4a!en"e a 43 word or expression is not modified in the TT, it remains untranslated, like proper or place names. A,aptation when we need to reword a sentence and adapt it so that it fits the norms and usage of the T3. Translation becomes freer and, as long as the content is not changed, we may reword and adapt the message. For instance, innavigable as Uimposible de manejarW. These strategies are the most common and general ones. &n many cases, different strategies are used simultaneously so that they interact and complement each other. For example, when we translate marshmallow fluff as Ualgodoncito de a'YcarW we are using modulation, looking for a similar idea in the T3 culture, and compensation of meaning, adding the diminutive suffix to increase familiarity. &.&. FOREI?NI@ATION AND DOMESTICATION Translation does not only involve giving the e-uivalent meaning in the T3, it also considers both the linguistic and the cultural values of the two languages. 4ome translators prefer changing the 43 values trying to make them more understandable and accessible for the T3 audience, this is known as domestication. .thers prefer keeping the values of the 43 and showing them just as they appear in the original, this is known as foreigni'ation. The notions were introduced by =enuti, who defined domesticating translation as the replacement of the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text with a text that is intelligible to the T3 reader and foreigni'ing translation as a translation that indicates linguistic and cultural differences of the text by disturbing the cultural codes that dominate the T3. +xample" in the 4panish dubbing of some sitcoms where 0merican characters talk about 4panish celebrities. >omestication strategies are necessary because we usually know little about popular culture of the T3. >omestication helps the translator to achieve a similar effect on the T3 audience as that which was originally intended in the 43. >omesticating translation is natural and smooth, but has the disadvantage of losing cultural information and violating authenticity and faithfulness. Foreigni'ing a translation helps to absorb the expressions of the T3 audience. The result of the translation might be useless because readers may not understand the translation because of their limited knowledge of the T3 culture. &.5. THE PROCESS OF DOCUMENTATION >ocumentation is a necessary process in translation and it involves the search for parallel texts, as well as the advice of natives and@or professionals and the use of translation memories. He distinguish between textual and lexical levels. Te%t$a! !e4e! includes multilingual texts, including texts in the 43, and parallel texts in the T3 (both authentic and translated ones). Le%i"a! !e4e! includes multilingual, bilingual or monolingual dictionaries, glossaries, speciali'ed terminological databases, etc. This level also includes legislation, leaflets, manuals, and human informants. 5.1. HUMANISTIC TEATS They deal with literature and philosophy, but this section will centre on literary text because is much more common. Literar( te%t are characteri'ed by an aesthetic overload" the language contained is marked by a series of resources aimed at transferring emotions to the reader. They present a language defined by a greater integration of content and form than in other types of texts, and by a certain vocation for originality and creativity. To translate literary texts appropriately, one should possess a certain literary competence, be an avid reader, and hold a special sensitivity towards literature in general. 3iterary works offer a great richness because they can combine different text types" narrati4e- ,e "ripti4e- "on"ept$a!- arg$'entati4e- in tr$"ti4eet". They can deal with many different topics, and they may alternate between narration and orality. 3iterature can also involve diverse styles, social, temporal and geographical dialects, and personal idiolects. They are usually strongly rooted in the source culture and they include a great deal of cultural references. 0ccording to 7urtado we can distinguish seven literary genres of literary translation" comic strips, journalism, didactic literature, essay, prose, drama and poetry. >epending on the goal of the text, the addressees and the status of the work, the translation could enter one of the following three different groups" arti ti" tran !ation- "riti"a! or ,i,a"ti" tran !ation an, a,aptation or #ree 4er ion . The task of the literary translation is" :. 8rasp the similarities and differences between literary and ordinary language. 9. &dentify and solve translation problems related to characteristic features of style. ?. &dentify and solve translation problems related to register changes, cultural and extra%linguistic reference, intertextuality and geographical, social or temporal dialects and idiolects. P. >evelop creativity. Q. &dentify and characteri'e the different literary genres.

). 1e aware of the dangers of ideological manipulation of language. 5.2. THE LAN?UA?E OF TOURISM Tourism is an open field, as opposed to the language of any other speciali'ed field because it includes many activities that can take part in a tourist process" travelling, culture, art, gastronomy, lodging, sports, etc. 0ll tourist texts share characteristics regarding vocabulary" optimistic, with a great deal of positive connotations, like #bargain$ or #low%cost$ instead of #cheap$. There is a presence of 'an( po!iti"a!!( "orre"t ter' that aim at minimi'ing the chances of hurting the addresseesW feelings. /se of inten i#(ing a,0e"ti4e an, a,4er. , such as #uni-uely, magnificent$ an, po iti4e no$n as #paradise, elegance, style,$. 0ll these elements must be recreated in the TT. &f the e-uivalent word does not imply the same level of positivity or optimism, another solution should be sought to have a similar effect on the addressee. The main problem of translating tourist texts is the wide number of fields that the translator needs to be familiar with" hotel management, sports, art, culture, entertainment, etc. 2ultural competence is essential when we face tourist texts, since moving among different cultures, customs, etc., the translator must understand the cultural referents and render them clearly in the T3. 4ome strategies can be used" explanation, paraphrasing, naturali'ation, omission. +veryday vocabulary is widely used and this minimi'es the level of speciali'ation of the texts. Finally, we must consider formality or informality of the register. &n 4panish we are often too informal, while +nglish is formal in certain sectors where the interlocutors are not friends or relatives. This is shown in the great amount of politeness markers used in +nglish as opposed to 4panish. Hhen translating one must keep this formality to a certain extent, however translating the text with all the formal markers may also sound very unnatural in 4panish. THE PRO1LEMS OF LITERARY TRANSLATION 2.1. T3e pe"i#it( o# !iterar( tran !ation 3iterary translators find problems as literary translation covers an enormous semantic and stylistic field. 0ntoine 1erman separates #literary$ from #non% literary$ translations, adding that !iterar( applies to Utext so bound that the translating act becomes a manipulation of signifiers, where two languages enter into collisionW. The Umanipulation of signifiers W brings in the -uestion of how UinvisibleW the translator should be. (ain implications saying a few words about the literary text, the translatorWs (in)visibility and the interrelationship between writing an original text and translating from an 43 to a T3. T3e !iterar( te%t There are some problems specific to !iterar( tran !ation, one of them is the a'.ig$it( in the definition of it, as 8ideon Toury states" D Translation of te&ts regarded as @literaryA in the source culture. D Translation of a te&t in a way that the product is acceptable as @literaryA to the recipient culture. The meaning of the term can vary depending on" % Hhether the 4T is originally thought of as a literary piece of work, so any #rewriting$ of it in the T3 is also classified as such. % &ndependently of the original classification of the 4T, the focus is put on the receiving end. &t is determining to establish the nature of the text in accordance what is regarded as #literary$ in the target culture. This has the complication of having to classify the original text and its translation as two texts belonging to two different genres. Hhat is recogni'ed as a literary text in one language is commonly recogni'ed as such in another language. The translator has the responsibility to ensure that, however complex the network, it does not afflict his translation with such a degree of interference as to become unacceptable by the target culture. The term pe"ia!i+e, tran !ation covers a very wide spectrum within two basic kinds of text" Te"3ni"a! tran !ation includes a large variety of texts that go beyond the limits of what is strictly technical and scientific (legal, philosophic, journalistic, medical, architecture, telecommunications, marketing, or broadly classed as #technical$ texts). &ts basic problem is of lexical nature. The translation cannot have any ambiguity or misinterpretation, this is what distinguishes a literary text (and its translation) from a technical text. 0 translator has to make sure that he understands the 4T terminology very well and he knows the precise e-uivalent in the T3. The translator may be familiar with the relevant terminology in both languages or he will have to use speciali'ed dictionaries and glossaries. 0 fre-uent occurrence in this type of translation is that the 43 terminology will involve some crucial neologism, in which case the translator finds that only a cal-ue or a straight borrowing is possible, with the added complication of an explanatory note. Literar( tran !ation focuses its attention not just on the content but also on the manner in which this content has been expressed. This is what makes literary translation different from technical translation, where form and content cannot be split. +-uivalence from 4T to TT can be stretched by the literary translator. The point here is not to judge the -uality of the translated text but to show the possibility of a number of variants easy enough to be found in a literary text but much less likely to occur in technical passages. 4o this is why literary translation is usually thought of as a very difficult type of translation, a Uvery speciali'edW type of translation, while technical texts may be used in order to select the best applicant for a given translating job, any translation competition invariably refers to the translation of literary texts. The writer of the original text presents a reality created by his own imagination and his individual way of focusing on this reality. The translator will be faced with a very individual work of art into which he will have to get fully immersed in order to be able to transfer it into another linguistic and cultural environment. This is a complicated task because it means entering into someone elseWs imaginative world which arises from an experience of life shaped by a linguistic and cultural environment totally different from his and that of the T3 readers. 1oth the translator and the T3 readers are outsiders from the start with the difference that it falls to the translator to make sure that the original text has been fully understood and that it has been reshaped as near as possible to the original manner and matter while it has been made perfectly coherent for the TT readers. 0ll this has a number of highly complex implications, beginning with the -uestion of 'eaning. The basic precondition of a successful translation is a good understanding of the original text, but how UtranslatableW will it beM 4ome specialists in the cognitive sciences insist that the real problem of translation is a proper understanding of a meaning which perhaps is not ade-uately grasped by the native reader. He wonder if meaning is what the author intended to convey or what the audience understands. 1ut the translator, after a very conscientious reading of the 4T, has understood the original message and his basic problem is to find the right e-uivalence in the TT. Translators look backwards and forwards, making sure that they have fully understood the 4T and that the TT they are creating is going to have the same impact on the TT reader as the 4T on the original reader. 4ome specialists summari'ed the position of the translator Uas reader, writer and researcher, SandT the complexity of literary translation and the variety of skills and abilities a translator needs to developW. There is another complication" if there may be a difference between what an author meant and what his audience understands, it follows that a translation, however good, however faithful, may not be understood in exactly the same way the translator meant it to be understood. 2.1.2. KDo'e ti"ationL or KForeigni+ationL* =enutiWs ,o'e ti"ation or #oreigni+ation refer to the transparency of the translated text. 7e and other leading specialists critici'e the kind of translation which UviolatesW the original text by creating a TT which looks like an original piece of writing, not like a translation. This UviolationW can be done in several ways. 1ermann describes twelve

different types of Udeforming tendenciesW" Urationali'ation, clarification, expansion, ennoblement and populari'ation, -ualitative impoverishment, -uantitative impoverishment, the destruction of rhythms, the destruction of underlying networks of signification, the destruction of linguistic patternings, the destruction of vernacular networks or their exotici'ation, the destruction of expressions and idioms, the effacement of the superimposition of languagesW. There are rules in the process of translating which cannot be avoided. First, there will have been some specific reason for choosing a particular literary work to be translated, a consideration of the characteristics of the literary system to which the chosen 4T belongs, and a consideration of the characteristics of the literary system into which the 4T will be translated. Then, the translator will have taken a decision respecting the style which will ensure a good acceptance at the receiving end, an overall style that fits into the literary system of the T3 and its conventions. This is the point at which he has to take the decision of either UdomesticatingW the TT or Uforeigni'ingW it. &f he chooses ,o'e ti"ating- the translated text will be fully immersed in the T3 and its own culture, resulting in what Toury calls an acceptable translation. &f he chooses #oreigni+ing- the resulting text would be seen as an ade uate translation, one which adheres to the source linguistic and literary norms. There is a limit to the amount of Uforeigni'ationW that can be introduced into the TT, a frontier beyond which comprehension in the receiving language and@or culture will suffer irreparable damage. This frontier hardly exists if a UdomesticatingW approach is chosen, because an excess of UdomesticationW may end up in a false translation, but never in an unintelligible one. There is an obvious limit to the UforeignW look of the translated text. 1ut in translation is very difficult to apply rules and theories in a very rigid way, so the most satisfactory approach is to opt for an intermediate solution. Toury concludes that Uin practice the decision made will be some combination of these two e&tremes" such as an ade uate translation with certain reservations" or under certain conditions" deriving from the target normsE. +ven if we believe in the bringing%the%reader%to%the%author theory, the thorough comprehension of the original text cannot be excused from the translatorWs task. The re-uirement of the full understanding of the original text, plus the full understanding of what exactly it may mean to the non%native reader, proves the complexity of the taskG it is an indicator of the fascination that this task brings with it. 0nd before going into the process of translating a literary text, we can surmise how Uspeciali'edW the process will be by pondering on any typical definition of what a literary text implies. <eichler stresses the personal relationship between creator and creation, while . (. 3otman reminds us of the personal relationship between the text and each individual reader (personal interpretation). 0ny type of translation implies a challenge, but in literary translation the challenge is greater because the translator has to contend not only with semantic problems but also with stylistic connotations inseparable from the content which will demand a constant and painful process of decision%making. .f the various Uforeign readersW of a literary piece of work, the translator will be the most meticulous reader and the first one to try and establish the relationship between the writer and his world, between the writer and his native readers, and between the original text and a text addressed to non%native readers. The translatorWs profound knowledge of the two languages will become a loving bond with these languages in all their manifestations. 3iterary translation is the most demanding type. 0s 3anders say, @how one says something can be as important" sometimes more important" than what one saysA . 7e differentiates between the re-uirements of technical and literary translation from the point of view of form and content" # in technical translations style is not a consideration so long as the informational content. The order of the cars is inconse uential if all the cargo arrives intact. In literary translation" the order of the cars can ma(e the difference between a lively" highly readable translation and a stilted" rigid" and artificial rendering that strips the original of its artistic and aesthetic essence" even its very soulA. 2.1.&. T3e 2riter a tran !ator an, t3e tran !ator a 2riter &t is common to see translation as a purely mechanical task of looking up words in a good dictionary. .ne thing that does not occur to those who take such a simplistic view of how language works is that the intimacy that a translator establishes with the original text means that he ends up by having a closer knowledge of the text than that of its own author. 1ut original writing is now seen more and more as one possible UtranslationW of the reality that surrounds an author. 2reativity is not easy to measure accurately but is more evident that translation is not just UimitationW but UcreationW and a form of literature. 0lso there is another notion gaining acceptance, which is that both translated text and original text share the characteristic of being simply one possible variant. 0s 3evine explains that the translator makes explicit a version which was implied in the original, and the reason why it was implied lies in the fact that it was only one out of many versions available to the writer of the original text. This writer UtranslatedW a given reality into words, and he had to contend with words in very much the same way as the translator who works from one language into another. 3evine worked in close collaboration with some authors that they did not mind what some people may see as a distortion of the original. The collaborations were so intense that after discussing a given passage, sometimes the author decided to change the original text. 2ollaboration between an author and his translator can be very fruitful. 4ome writers trust their translator even more than they trust themselves, but in other cases the collaboration goes wrong. 0n original writer has given his final version of a specific reality. 0 complication of this is that the translator will ultimately be subjective in his choice of target version, but this is not to be taken in a negative sense. 4ubjectivity cannot be avoided by the writer or the translator. Two different writers may describe exactly the same thing, but in very different words and styles. The translatorWs position is no different. 7e will have to strive to get to the bottom of what the writer is trying to say, a process in which the connotations of words will make difficult the creation of a TT, but the translator will then be in the same position as the original writer. There are no perfect synonyms in any language, so the possibility of it existing across languages is even more problematic. The translator will be in the same position as the original writer because the created TT may well be a faithful reflection of the 4T, but only one possible variant since a different translator will almost certainly provide a different version e-ually faithful and also subjective. 1ut this is not simply a matter of the translatorWs congenital characteristics, it is the result of hard study, long practice and often detailed research that are the trade mark of the conscientious translator. To summari'e" it is not easy to differentiate between the creative powers that have gone into the composition of an original 4T and the creative powers that have gone into the composition of a corresponding TT. &t could be argued that the author has transferred thoughts and feelings into the realm of words, while the translator has transferred words into words, but this would tell only half the story of the translating process because how can the translator carry out the words%to%words process without taking into account the thoughts and the feelings behind the words that make up the 4TM 0nd since the translator has to decide on the exact meaning of the words that make up the 4T before deciding how best to convert this meaning into a TT, perhaps the conclusion is that the creative work entailed is twice as much as the work entailed in writing the original text. CONTRASTI;E ANALYSIS Intro,$"tion 2ontrastive 0nalysis is the comparison of two languages by paying attention to its differences and similarities. &t is used in the following fields" :. Translation. 9. Teaching. ?. 3inguistics. P. 5rincipal programming for writing a textbook. Q. +rror 0nalysis. &n translation, it focuses on" :. The translator should be faithful to the text and know the exact e-uivalents in the two languages (source and target).

9. 7e should understand that most of the differences of the two languages are not just semantic but also cultural. ?. The translator understands that most of these come from different beliefs, different values or different patterns of thought. Bin, o# "ontra ti4e ana!( i C!a i"a! Contra ti4e Ana!( i 3anguage is a self%contained system. &t believes in 2ode 3inguistics. 2ode 3inguistics deals with language as an abstract system, using grammatical competence to distinguish syntax, semantics, phonology and lexicon. &t is a linguistically%oriented approach. &t is static. The focus is on linguistic elements. Mo,ern Contra ti4e Ana!( i 3anguage is a means of communication. &t believes in 7uman 3inguistics. 7uman 3inguistics deals with language as a concrete system, using communicative competence to describe the process of human communication. >omain of 5ragmatics. &s is a communicatively%oriented or participant%oriented approach. &t is dynamic. The focus is on the process of development of discourse as the basis for communication. The discourse analyst studies the relationship between language and the context in which it is used. Degree o# ,i##i"$!t( These are organi'ed in a hierarchy. 0 contrastive analyst should predict the level of difficulty in a foreign language to avoid using a high degree of difficulties along with a high degree of occurrences in the same text Le4e! >: Tran #er This transfer presents no difficulty, thus #level 'ero$ is given to it. Fo difference or contrast but positive transfer" similar sounds, lexical items, structures or concepts of negation and interrogation and word order are seen in the two languages. The translator can simply transfer (positively) a sound, lexical item or structure from native to target language. 7ello 7ola Le4e! 1: Coa!e "en"e &n this case two or more items in the source language are only one item in the target language. 7andset, telephone, phone telNfono (uch, many mucho Le4e! 2: Un,er,i##erentiation 0n item in the source language is absent in the target language. 0nyhow can only be translated according to context Le4e! &: Reinterpretation 0n item that exists in the source language is given a new shape or distribution. The pronunciation of the word #internet$ differ in +nglish%4panish

Le4e! 5: Sp!it 0n item in the source language refers to more than one item in the target language. head Z cabe'a (parte del cuerpo), director, dirigir, l[der play Z jugar, tocar un instrumento &!m working at the moment Z tengo un trabajo, estoy trabajando Contra ti4e ana!( i o# t2o !ang$age at !e%i"a! !e4e! 4tudying the lexical relationship among the languages helps the translator to choose the best vocabulary he needs in order to convey the meaning. 2ontrastive analysis looks at the formal, semantic and pragmatic properties of the word in the two languages. 5atterns of similarities and differences that cause problems in vocabulary or translation of a text" Cognate These words have similar pronunciation and meaning in two languages. class clase lemonlimXn pairpar )or, i'i!ar in 'eaning .$t ,i##erent in #or' The words may have the same meaning but the cultural connotations in each language may be different. 5artner pareja drink bebida )or, 2it3 trange 'eaning 2an create misunderstanding in the two languages. conservatoryhabitaciXn -ue forma parte de la casa y el jard[n al mismo tiempo I,io' (phrasal verbs or metaphoric expressions). look after cuidarG catch up recuperarG mother%in%law suegra )or, t3at 3a4e ,i##erent "onnotation in t3e t2o !ang$age &t means that some words may have neutral meaning in our native language but they bear some offensive or immoral connotation in target language. (oorish moroG 8ypsy gitano ?eograp3i"a!!( re tri"te, 2or, or e%pre ion $ e, ,i##erent!( in ,i##erent ,ia!e"t petrol (/nited 6ingdom) gas (/nited 4tates)G lift (/nited 6ingdom) elevator (/nited 4tates)G film (/nited 6ingdom) movie (/nited 4tates) Ho2 to "o'pare t2o (nta"ti"6gra''ati"a! tr$"t$re Follow these signals" :. Hord .rder. 9. &nflection. ?. 2orrelation of form. P. Function words. Q. &ntonation. ). 4tress. A. 5ause. Contra ti4e Ana!( i at ,i "o$r e !e4e! 7Di "o$r e Ana!( i 8 5ragmatic aspects of language according to >iscourse 0nalysis" Pre $ppo ition assumed \ known the shared knowledge. Conte%t 3inguistic and 5hysical contexts can help. Dei"ti" e%pre ion Hords which can never be interpreted unless the physical context (reference) of the speaker is known (pronouns, possessives, demonstratives and some adverbs) E!!ip i The voluntary grammatical omission in a sentence. &t is a universal feature of all language. S$. tit$tion 0 word is not omitted but instead is substituted by another more general one. &t is also a universal feature. Con0$n"tion The signals between segments of the discourse. Propo ition These express the coherence relations. Spee"3 a"t 7i!!o"$tionar( a"t 8 They show the functions of language and can be direct or indirect. Co3e ion There are links and connections in a text that keep the text together and help the reader to interpret and find the relations between different parts. Co3eren"e Those concepts which are expressed in a text and make it meaningful in some sense to the reader or recipient of the message.

TEMA I: TEAT ANALYSIS AND THE TRANSLATION OF NON9SPECIALI@ED TEATS

NON STANDARD LAN?UA?E The term no%standard language applied to a literary work can cover a number of possibilities. The translation of dialect. The very word Bdialect! is a complex notion. To the professional linguistic any language variant is a dialect, whether the approximation is a synchronic or a diachronic one. .n the other hand, to the ordinary people there is a very clear difference between Blanguage! and Bdialect!, the latter the subordinate one, used as a pejorative way of referring to something below the Bnorm! and unworthy of any educated person. 1loomsfield applied the notion of language variants to the type of language which does not follow the norm and, in this respect, he made a clear distinction between two forms of speech based on geographical intelligibility and on the social status of the speakers. 0ccording to 1loomsfield!s definition, it becomes apparent that 8eneral 3inguistics and 4ociolinguistics are closely interrelated in their approach to dialect. Following the same line of thought as 4aussure, 3yons points out that linguistis relate the term Bdialect! or Blanguage! and says that a language may be composed of several dialects. 7e disregards the negative implications of the everyday use of the term Bdialect! and does not accept that the dialect of a particular region or a particular social class is a degenerate version of the Bnorm!, since he knows that, from a historical point of view, what has become the established norm is not different from the non%standard dialects. 7ockett sees language and dialect on the same level but focuses their difference on the concept of Bidiolect!, which he had already defined as Bthe totality of speech habits of a single person at a given time!. 0lvar gives a comprehensible explanation of what the word Bdialect! can enclose, including a historical view as one of the approaches that places dialect in a susbsidiary relation in respect of language. 0 number of extra factors Ksocial, political, cultural% contribute to explain the reasons for the main approach. (artyn Hakelin considers dialects are mutual intelligibility. 1ut not everybody accepts the principle of mutual intelligibility because in some areas speakers are not able to understand each other, and the varieties used are considered dialects of the same language. 1loomfield wrote that what he called Blocal dialect! varies from place to place to the point that it may not be intelligible to speakers from a different part of the country. 2hambers and Trudgill also agree, while the criterion of mutual intelligibility has the advantage of characterising dialects as subparts of a language, it is not entirely successful because it does not always work. They say the term language is from a linguistic point of view Ba relatively nontechnical term!, and in order to be more rigorous in the use of descriptive labels, they prefer Bvariety! to be used as Ba neutral term to apply to any particular kind of language which wish, for some purpose, to consider as a single entity!, Baccent!, which refers Bto the way in which a speaker pronounces, and therefore refers to a variety which is phonetically and@or phonologically different from other varieties!. >ialect variation applies mainly to geographical areas, regional dialects and to social class, social dialects. There are other factors, such as period of time involved or individual user. <egional dialects are associated with geographical areas. 7owever, it is a known fact that the boundaries set between geographical areas tend to be established in terms of political, cultural or social factors rather than linguistic ones. This may create a chain of dialect variants where each link is almost identical to the one before and to the one after, but mutual intelligibility decreases with the distance between links. 4ocial dialects make reference to varieties of language used by speakers from different social strata, that is the difference between social class, religion and ethnicity. 3inguistics agree that Bdialect!, in its speciali'ed meaning, is any linguistic variant, nevertheless, in everyday speech it has the connotations of Bnon%standard variety!. The use of non%standard language in literature is Ban author!s attempt to represent in writing a speech that is restricted regionally, socially, or both! Non tan,ar, !ang$age has been used in literature for a long time with various pragmatic objectives in mind, such as 1lack +nglish in 0merican novels. &n this literary genre the characters speak a dialectal variant in contrast with other characters who speak the recognised standard language. 0uthors do not write as specialists in linguistics but as artists, who use dialect as a way of expression. The examples of literary dialect, therefore, vary considerably. The author has to strike a balance between what is possible and what is convenient. 1esides, most writers are not totally familiar with the dialect they choose to use and they need to rely on the normal alphabet, instead of the phonetical one, to represent the dialectical pronunciation. They tend to use markers to represent a group rather than a single individual, creating a form of language that could be understood by the readers but that it generally has nothing in common with the dialect it tries to represent. 0nother strategies such as the use of anomalous syntax and morphology" #anRt it$, #this wouldnRt do at no price$, #fawther$ are used to be recogni'ed immediately by the eye" #eye dialect$. The choice of dialect could also be determined by the authorRs decision not to use the really appropriate variant for fear that the reader will not understand it, so another variant known by the author but easier to understand might be chosen, even if itRs not the right one, to keep the form of local color. 0nother device chosen is code switching (between different language varieties) which is also used to give a vivid image of how language works in real life. 4ometimes authors use explanatory footnotes to make sure that the reader will understand the dialect used in the text. Co,e 2it"3ing is also used to give a vivid image of how language works in real life. TRANSLATION STRATE?IES .ne of the first challenges when attempting translating a dialectical literary work is the understanding of the 4T. Then, the next problem to solve is how to find the right sort of language to use in the translation. &s there any dialectical form, any non standard variety in the T2 that can reflect the peculiarities of the 4TM There are three strategies a translator can use when faced with a dialectical text" % to attempt some form of non%standard variety available in the target language % to use standard language only, with occasional indicators such as # he@she said in his@her regional dialect$ % to ignore completely the non%standard language and to stick to the standard norm in the TT. 4panish translators, with few exceptions, tend to neutralise any deviations from the norm, whether the 4T is fully dialectical or it uses some common non%standard phonetic and grammatical irregularities.