[RIKKYO PANEL] THE ROLE OF TRANSLATORS AT JAPANESE UNIVERSITIES FROM A LINGUISTIC PERSPECTIVE

Mikako NAGANUMA Associate Professor, Rikkyo Graduate School of Intercultural Communication mikako@katch.ne.jp
Abstract: This paper explores the role of translators from a systemic functional linguistic perspective, focusing on practitioner-researchers who teach translation in the context of Japanese universities. Apart from a long tradition of the grammar translation method in Japans foreign language education, a growing number of universities currently provide translation education which is not necessarily aimed to train professionals. One of the common features shared by those translation classes seems to guide students to differentiate honyaku (translation) from so-called eibunwayaku or bunpouyakudoku (grammar translation). Because of this burgeoning trend being observed in Japanese universities, it is necessary to shed light from broader perspectives on issues and problems facing translation education, including its academization. With a view to seeking for future directions of translation education in Japan, Id like to propose one of potential roles of translators to bridge the gap between theory and practice of translation in a Japanese university setting. Key Words: systemic functional linguistics (SFL); Japanese university setting; practitioner-researchers; theory and practice; nominalization.

1. INTRODUCTION
The role of translators encompasses a wide rage of topics from diverse perspectives. I will limit my discussion here to a current Japanese university setting where quite a few translators are involved in teaching translation but unfortunately they are seldom blessed with opportunities to share information with each other. This paper aims to suggest how translators play their potential role as a practitioner-researcher in a pedagogical setting. Teaching translation has yet to be based on a clear academic paradigm at the university level in Japan. As this issue possibly entails different perspectives, I will mainly focus on a linguistic one, to be more specific, systemic functional linguistics (SFL) with which we can access a useful tool to analyze various types of source texts

(ST) and target texts (TT) for educational purposes. SFL is a linguistic theory which can be applied to analyze texts within contexts and to help train translators and interpreters (Halliday, 1994, p. xxix) for their practical purposes. It is essential to consider how to empower both translation teachers and students in the environment of a university setting in Japan. The SFL text analysis provides a specialized language or metalanguage, which allows us to explore texts by describing how different elements function to realize experiential, interpersonal and textual meanings (Butt et al., 2000, p. 6).

2. TRANSLATION EDUCATION: THEORY AND PRACTICE

There are two types of translation education: vocational and academic education. As Baker (1992) explains, the former provides training in practical skills but does not include a theoretical component, whereas the latter includes a strong theoretical component. She claims that the value of this theoretical component 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 and exploring the advantages and disadvantages of various ways of doing things is itself impossible to perform unless one has a thorough and intimate knowledge of the objects and tools of ones work (Baker, 1992, pp. 1-2). When it comes to translation education in a Japanese university setting, how to combine theory and practice and to balance the two has not fully discussed to date. The teacher needs to analyze and assess students outputs to effectively demonstrate differences between translation and grammar translation. The internal legacy of students who are extremely familiar with the grammar translation method acquired from their long experience in foreign language learning dies hard, often resulting in confusion and misunderstanding of the very meaning of translation on the side of students. This phenomenon is largely due to studying foreign languages, in particular English, for entrance examinations in Japan, as was experienced in western countries by applicants who learned Greek and Latin: Translation, as a result, came to be associated with the process of testing the knowledge of grammar and vocabulary in the foreign language and the equivalents found in dictionaries and vocabulary lists were viewed as constituting the authoritative correct answers (Anderman, 2007, p. 52). Searching web sites open to the public leads us to the fact that there are around 180 Japanese universities currently offering various types of translation classes, most of which are obviously

different from foreign language education based on the grammar translation method. As one of those who have been involved in teaching translation as a practitioner-researcher at both graduate and undergraduate levels in Japan, I repeated trials and errors over the last several years partly because of a shortage of role models combining theory and practice of translation reasonably suited for a Japanese university setting. The sharp contrast between theory and practice has been widely witnessed in various times and fields. Therefore, this challenge is not unique to translation education in Japan. In fact, the book of Renaissance allegorical images (Cesare Ripas Iconologia) published in Rome in the early 17th century depicted theory and practice as shown in Figure 1 (Johnson, 1994). In two pieces of allegorical picture, theory is presented as an image of a young noble woman looking upwards with a pair of compasses over her head, while practice is an image of an aged woman looking down, dressed in a servile manner. When taking a closer look at the latter, however, the decrepit woman has a pair of compasses and a rule in her hands to support her body. The compasses and the rule denote reason and the measure of things respectively. The allegorical image of practice not only implies its rigorousness, but also reminds us of the complementary and dynamic relationship between theory and practice (as symbolized by the compasses and the rule).

Figure 1: Allegorical Images of Theory and Practice, from Iconologia or Moral Emblem (Cesare Ripa, 1976 in Johnson, 1994, p. 64, p. 66)

3. TRANSLATION AND LINGUISTICS

As interlingual translation renders a text from one language to another, dealing with at least two different languages, it is natural to speculate that translation must have been closely related to the study of language or linguistics. The actual relationship between translation and linguistics, however, has been somehow complex. For example, Bell expresses his feeling of unease and puzzlement about translation and linguistics by saying (1991, p. xv): The translation theorists, almost without exception, have made little systematic use of techniques and insights of contemporary linguistics (linguistics of the last twenty years or so) and the linguists, for their part, have been at best neutral and at worst actually hostile to the notion of a theory of translation. Although linguistics cannot solve all the problems facing translators, the interaction between translation and linguistics shall not be denied. Anderman points out that the relationship could be two different forms. She explains that in the case of Nida and Catford it expresses itself in an attempt to formulate a linguistic theory of translation and it may also take the less ambitious form of just an ongoing interaction between the two, each drawing on the findings of the other whenever this is mutually beneficial (2007, p. 54). Reviewing the history of translation studies makes us realize that it was linguistic approaches that liberated translators from long-lasting dichotomous debates around literal (word-for-word) and free (sense-for-sense) translation. We are entitled to access linguistic theories for the purpose of improving our own professional translating and teaching practices in an effective way. Then, how can we utilize some useful linguistic theories as a tool to empower our product, process, and pedagogy of translation?

4. CASE STUDY: NOMINALIZATION AS A GRAMMATICAL METAPHOR

It is educationally significant in the translation classroom to account for translational shifts, in other words, how to make a departure from formal correspondence between ST and TT under certain circumstances. Catford defines shifts as departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL (source language) to the TL (target language) (1965, p. 73). This section of the paper showcases a brief study of applying some concepts of SFL metalanguages to one of the challenging issues in translational shifts between English and Japanese: nominalization as a grammatical metaphor. This case study seeks to demonstrate how to raise the awareness of students regarding differences between translation and grammar translation, paying attention to translational shifts related to nominalization due to a contextual pressure.

The concept of grammatical metaphor was introduced by Halliday (1985/1994), as being comprised of two types: ideational and interpersonal grammatical metaphors. Nominalization belongs to the former type and Halliday explains (1994, p. 352): Nominalizing is the single most powerful resource for creating grammatical metaphor. By this device, process (congruently worded as verbs) and properties (congruently worded as adjectives) are reworded metaphorically as nouns; instead of functioning in the clause, as Process or Attribute, they function as Thing in the nominal group. In the SFL model, language has three metatfunctionsideational, interpersonal, and textualwhich are three simultaneous strands of meaning. In order to become aware of differences between translation and grammar translation, it is essential to take into consideration those three metafunctions, all of which are deeply related to equivalence and shifts in translation. It has long been instructed in some popular translation textbooks published in Japan that nominalization in English should be unpacked and then translated to Japanese so as to make translated Japanese expressions sound more natural. Table 1 shows typical examples found in one of those translation textbooks. This kind of examples is commonly used with regard to how to avoid peculiarities of language use in translation or translationese. It is important to get away from the grammar translation method by unpacking nominalized English expressions even though they are grammatically quite correct. For example, both ST1 and ST2 in Table 1 may be rendered without unpacking into Japanese, something like and . What is missing here, however, is an explanation of what has motivated the translators choices which are based on not only ideational but also interpersonal and textual metafunctions realized in lexicogrammar. Table 1: How to Translate English Nominalization into Japanese (Based on Anzai, 1996, p. 13) ST: nominalization in English 1. Years of study of foreign cultures has convinced me that what is really important is to understand ones own. 2. Ignorance of foreign customs can result in unexpected misunderstandings. TT: unpacked in Japanese 1. 2. How to unpack years of study of foreign cultures after I have studied foreign cultures for many years ignorance If we dont know

In the above examples, the intuitive naturalness seems to be the only reason why nominalization in English should be unpacked in Japanese. It has been traditionally explained by leading translation practitioners and linguists in Japan that English is a noun-oriented language and Japanese a verb-oriented language so that rendering English nouns into Japanese verbs is one of typical strategies to produce natural translation (e.g., Anzai, 1995; Egawa, 1964/1991; Hirako, 1999; Ikegami, 1981; Ohno, 1978; Toyama, 1987; Yanabu, 2004, etc.). This idea highlights linguistic preferences between English and Japanese, but lacks in further reasoning to analyze why another shift is also observed in translation of the opposite direction, from Japanese to English, in a certain context of situation or register. The following example 3 shows that the nominalization of ST in Japanese is unpacked to form congruent expressions in the English TT. Example 3: Asahi Shinbun Editorial (Nov. 10th, 2007) & IHI/Asahi Editorial (Nov. 13th, 2007) ST: Nominalization in Japanese [Literal translation] It really is the Diet of a series of tremors. Prime Minister Abes abrupt resignation, Prime Minister Fukudas inauguration, a stir of a grand coalition, Minshuto chief Ozawas announcement of resignation and later retract. There was also an LDP election for its president. TT: Unpacked in English The current Diet session has been jolted by a series of political tremors. At the outset of the session, then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe abruptly announced his resignation. Yasuo Fukuda, picked by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party as new party president to succeed Abe, was elected prime minister. Then, the proposal of a grand coalition between the LDP and the main opposition party, Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan), caused a political stir. After the proposal fell through, Minshuto chief Ichiro Ozawa said he would step down, but then flip-flopped on his decision. In order to explain this type of shifts concerning nominalization, we have to look at register variables in ST and TT (Table 2). The field of this newspaper editorial article deals with Japanese political situations which are assumed to be very familiar to Japanese ST readers because around that time

Japans mass media covered these news topics almost every day, but of course this context was not the same outside Japan. Considering the tenor of TT as a variable of register, nominalized expressions are too condensed for general readers outside Japan to understand their propositional meanings given their unfamiliarity with the topics. It can be said that a congruent (not metaphorical) form must have been chosen in English for an interpersonal reason, resulting in shifts of ideational and textual metafunctions for worldwide readers. Table 2: Register Variables in Example 3 ST3: Asahi Shinbun in Japanese Field Tenor Mode Japanese political situations Japanese readers Written to be read TT3: IHT/Asahi in English Japanese political situations Worldwide readers Written to be read

5. THE ROLE OF PRACTITIONER-RESEARCHERS IN PRODUCT, PROCESS, AND PEDAGOGY

Translators constantly make motivated decisions in their translating practice. Through this decision-making practice or process, translated texts are created as a product. Theory can investigate the end product as a result of the decision-making process. Bell states (1991, p. 13) a theory of translation, to be comprehensive and useful, must attempt to describe and explain both the process and the product. Hatim and Mason (1990, pp. 3-4) suggest that the translation process contains the negotiation of meaning between producers and receivers of texts and that translated texts are the result of motivated choice: producers of texts have their own communicative aims and select lexical items and grammatical arrangement to serve those aims. It is a translating process that creates a product which is to be analyzed in theory. The theory could be said to be a metapractice of translation (translation of translation). The fruits resulting from theoretical studies can be utilized in teaching translation for pedagogical purposes. Therefore, the role of translators as a practitioner-researcher in an educational setting is not only to teach practice based on their own experiences, but also to apply theoretical analyses at micro and macro levels to education as a means of retracing the translators pathways of decision-making process. The practitioner-researcher in a Japanese university setting is expected to play a role to bridge the gap between theory and practice, thus mediating product, process, and pedagogy of translation as illustrated in Figure 2.

PRACTICE PRODUCT METAEDUCATION

as

TRANSLATOR PRACTITIONERRESEARCHER THEORY PROCESS METAPRACTICE

EDUCATION PEDAGOGY METATHEORY

Figure 2: Practitioner-researchers Role in Product, Process, and Pedagogy of Translation

References
[1] Anderman, G. (2007). Linguistics and translation In P. Kuhiwczak & K. Littau (Eds.), A companion to translation studies. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. [2] Anzai, T. (1995). Eibun honyakujyutsu. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo. [3] Anzai, T. (1996). Honyaku eibunpou training manual. Tokyo: Babel Press. [4] Baker, M. (1992). In other words: A coursebook on translation. London and New York: Routledge. [5] Bell, R. (1991). Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London and New York: Longman. [6] Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., & Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional grammar: An explorers guide, 2nd edition. Sydney: NCELTR Macquarie University. [7] Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [8] Egawa, T. (1964/1991). Eibunpou kaisetsu. Tokyo: Kanekoshobou. [9] Halliday, M. A. K. (1985/1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold. [10] Hatim, B., & Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and translator. London: Longman. [11] Hirako, Y. (1999). Honyaku no genri. Tokyo: Taishukan. [12] Ikegami, Y. (1981). Suru to naru no gengogaku. Tokyo: Taishukan. [13] Johnson, B. (1994). The wake of deconstruction. Hoboke: Blackwell. [14] Ohno, S. (1978). Nihongo no bunpou wo kangaeru. Tokyo: Iwanami. [15] Toyama, S. (1987). Nihongo no ronri. Tokyo: Chuokoron-shinsha. [16] Yanabu, A. (2004). Kindai nihongo no shisou. Tokyo: Hosei University Press.