Lingua inglese I

05/10/23
*Fidelity translation.
Jesus: might represent a translation problem. Do we really have Gesù as the only
translation option? Cristo may be more appropriate as we, in Italy, use it with a curse
connotation or as exclamation, frustration – it has a hard sound, which makes it a good
choice when we need to express a strong feeling. It fits the character (who is young).
Gesù gives a different connotation, but a weaker one compared to Cristo.
Other options (diamine, cavolo) might risk losing the religious connotation “Jesus” puts
into the sentence.

! Mind the syntax -- world order produces meaning !

“I look at the bag and think, Jesus, this is how much she doesn't want to live with me.”
The first part of the sentence can remain unvaried, however the second part should be
changed in order to mantain a linguistic coherence to Italian. Being loyal to the text is
important and being too inventive might be useless – the text needs to be recreated in
a way that fits Italian, not according to my standards.
Per evitare i calchi lessicali e sintattici mi devo chiedere “lo scriverei mai se non avessi
il testo che mi influenza?”
Nella traduzione ufficiale è stata inserita una coloritura, una sorta di libertà, una scelta
che gratifica il testo di arrivo: this is what we call a Translation Shift.

! la variazione non è mai innocua !

Reading the text aloud might help you in the decision process.

Martin Dressler translation

Il simple past risulta essere un problema di traduzione perché renderlo in italiano è
ben diverso.
Indicativo: esprime certezza congiuntivo: esprime incertezza
l'Italiano non tollera le ripetizioni, mentre in Inglese è il contrario.
Divergence: partendo da un termine inglese si hanno in italiano diverse opzioni.
Anche il possessivo risulta essere una divergence in quanto in Inglese questo viene
espresso, ma l'Italiano ne fa a meno a meno che non ci sia un possibilità di equivoco.
Perilous is best translated with pernicioso, periglioso instead of pericoloso, which isn't
the right fit.
Into translation studies – Friday theory
The term «translation»
First attested around 1340, it derives either from Old French translation or more directly from
the Latin translatio («transporting»), coming from the participle of the verb transferre («to carry
over»).

The concept of translation: as a phenomenon, as a product, as a process.

The process of translation:

The process of translation between two different written languages involves the changing of an
original written text (source text => ST) in the original verbal language (source language
=> SL) into a written text (target text => TT) in a different verbal language (target
language => TL)

The ST => TT configuration is the most prototypical of «interlingual translation».

Roman Jakobson in his seminal paper «On Linguistic Aspects of Translation» (1959),
Russo-American structuralist Roman Jakobson (1896-1982) described three
categories of translation - Intralingual translation, or ‘rewording’ – ‘an interpretation of
verbal signs by means of other signs of the same language’. Interlingual translation, or
‘translation proper’ – ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language’.
Intersemiotic translation, or ‘transmutation’ – ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of
signs of non-verbal sign systems’.

the study of translation as an academic subject only began in the second half of the twentieth
century.

James Stratton Holmes (Iowa, 1924 – Amsterdam, 1986) is known as both a major
translator/editor of poetry from Dutch and as a teacher and researcher of translation. He has
had a long-lasting influence on the development of the field of translation as an independent
academic subject with his landmark essay “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies”. First
presented at a 1972 conference in Copenhagen, it is “generally regarded as the founding
statement of the discipline”.

From the late eighteenth century to the 1960s, translation was an element of language learning
=> grammar-translation: the grammatical rules and structures of foreign languages were
practised through the translation of a series of usually unconnected and artificially constructed
sentences. In the 1960s United States, literary translation was promoted by the translation
workshop concept  Translation workshops were meant to promote the introduction of new
translations into the target culture and to discuss the principles of text comprehension and of
the translation process.

Comparative literature: literatures are studied and compared transnationally and

transculturally.

Contrastive linguistics – the study of two languages in contrast – also focused on translation as
a subject of research.

(
In his paper «The Name and Nature of Translation Studies», James S. Holmes put forward an
overall framework describing what translation covers. The framework was presented by the
Israeli scholar Gideon Toury as in the following figure:

Translation studies

Pure TS:

1. Theoretical => aim => establishment of theoretical principles to explain and predict the
phenomena of translation.
2. Descriptive => aim => description of the phenomena of translation.

Theoretical TS:

 General branch => general laws for translation as a whole

 Partial branch => theoretical studies restricted according to:
 Medium => written vs. spoken translation; machine vs. human translation
 Area => specific languages and/or cultures
 Rank => text-level analysis (word/sentence)
 Text-type => genres (literary/technical)
 Time => history of translation
 Problem => categories of problems

Descriptive TS examine:

 Product: existing translations (a ST-TT pair, or comparative analysis of a ST vs. several

TTS)
 Function: the function of translations in the target sociocultural context (sociology of
translation)
 Process: the psychology of translation (cognitive perspective => i.e. think-aloud
protocols).
Applied translation studies

Applied TS concern applications to the practice of translation:

 Translator training: teaching methods

 Translation aids: grammars/dictionaries…
 Translation criticism: evaluation of translation (marking of student translations/review of
published translations)

The Applied branch is underdeveloped. It might be expanded as follows:

Developments since Holmes:

 Equivalence (see Chapter 3)

 Taxonomies of the translation product and investigation of the translation process
(Chapter 4)
 Text type and skopos/purpose (Chapter 5)
 Discourse analysis (Chapter 6)
 Descriptive Translation Studies (Chapter 7)
 The cultural turn (Chapter 8)
 The invisibility of the translator (Chapter 9)
 Deconstruction and the challenge to equivalence (Chapter 10)

The van Doorslaer ‘map’: Translation

Translation looks at the act of translating and is divided into:

 Lingual mode (interlingual, intralingual)

 Media (printed, audiovisual, electronic)
 Mode (covert/overt translation, direct/indirect translation, retranslation, self-
translation*, sight translation…)
 Field (political, journalistic, technical, literary, scientific…)
Taxonomy of strategies:

Taxonomy of procedures:

11/10/23

12/10/23

From Excerpt 1

“fucking death hole” = una cazzo di fossa di leoni.

Bloody=

Il resto sulle notes.

Chapter 2- Translation

The dichotomy between «word-for-word» («literal») and «sense-for-sense» («free») translation

dominated translation theory for centuries. It was a recurring theme «emerging again and
again with different degrees of emphasis in accordance with differing concepts of language and
communication.

St Jerome In De optimo genere interpretandi he described his translation strategy.

Of a letter from Pope Epiphenius to the Bishop of Jerusalem: “Now I not only admit but freely
announce that in translating from the Greek – except of course in the case of the Holy
Scripture, where even the syntax contains a mystery – I render not word-for-word, but sense
for-sense”.

St. Jerome’s provided the clearest expression of the literal vs. free poles in translation. The
same dyad has emerged in other ancient translation traditions => Chinese translation of the
Buddhist sutras from Sanskrit.

First phase => Eastern Han Dynasty and the Three Kingdoms period (148-265 CE): initial
word-for-word strategy out of loyalty to the sacred words. But: translations were almost
incomprehensible

Second phase => Jin Dynasty and the Northern and Southern Dynasties (265-589 CE) =>
swing towards yìyì (= free, sense-for-sense translation), as opposed to zhìyì (= more
“straightforward” translation => faithfulness)

Third phase => Sui Dynasty, Tang Dynasty and Northern Song Dynasty (589-1100 CE) =>
increased linguistic and theological competence => attention to style, no literary polishing.

Translation choices were explained in the prefaces to these texts.

The most influential were written by Dào’ān, a religious leader who directed a vast translation
programme of Buddhist sutras. These prefaces considered: «(…) the dilemma which ever faced
Buddhist translators: whether to make a free, polished and shortened version adapted to the
taste of the Chinese public, or a faithful, literal, repetitious and therefore unreadable
translation.

The literal vs. free poles resurface in the translation tradition of the Arab world.

Abbāsid period (750–1250 CE): Translation of Greek scientific and philosophical works into
Arabic.

- First method was literal with borrowings

- Later methods were more sense-for-sense and saw an increased use of Arabic
neologisms.

In the 14th and 15th centuries language and translation became the sites of a power struggle.
Latin had a stranglehold over knowledge and religion until challenged by the Humanist
movement.

The Protestant Reformation also challenged the hegemony of Latin through the translation of
the Bible into vernacular languages.

Censorship, heresy charges => Spanish Inquisition.

Like St. Jerome, Luther rejects the word-for-word translation strategy => unreadability,
unintelligibility.

Etienne Dolet’s attempt to give a systematic theory

Dryden

In the preface to his translation of Ovid’s Epistles in 1680, Dryden reduces all translation to
three categories.

Tyler

Schleiermacher
Chapter 3 – Introducing Translation Theories
Roman Jakobson: meaning and equivalence

Jakobson draws on Saussure, then moves on to consider the problems of linguistic meaning and
equivalence => equivalence IN meaning between words in different languages.

There is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units.

Famous example: Russian syr ≠ English cheese: English cottage cheese = Russian tvarog, NOT
syr.

Linguistic universalism vs linguistic relativity or determinism

Linguistic universalism: considers that, although languages may differ in the way they
convey meaning and in the surface realizations of that meaning, there is a more or less shared
way of thinking and experiencing the world.

Linguistic relativity or determinism: claims that differences in language shape different

conceptualizations of the world => Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

Nida
Nida provided the translator with a technique for decoding the ST and a procedure for encoding
the TT.

ANALYSIS, TRANSFER, RESTRUCTURING.

Words don’t have a fixed meaning – they acquire meaning through their contexts and can
generate varying responses according to culture

Linguistic meaning: his house – his journey – his kindness

Referential meaning: denotative meaning => son = male child

Emotive, or connotative, meaning => “Don’t worry, son”.

The old terms such as “literal”, “free” and “faithful translation” are discarded => two new basic
“types of equivalence”:

1) Formal equivalence: focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content (…)
the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different
elements in the source language

2) Dynamic equivalence: is based on what Nida calls the «principle of equivalent effect», where
«the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that
which existed between the original receptors and the message. The message «aims at
complete naturalness of expression» => target-orientedness: the foreigness of the ST is
minimized.

Peter Newmark - semantic vs. communicative translation

Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to
that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render, as closely
as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual
meaning of the original.
02/11/23

Safeway, elemento culturo-specifico: catena di supermercati, un elemento sacrificabile nella

traduzione; non c'è una soluzione corretta (tra soluzione foregnizing o domesticating).

34 size: altro elemento culturo-specifico relativo alle misurazioni del seno; si tratterebbe di una
terza (potremmo aggiungere abbondante o inserire una dizione più tecnica come coppa a/b/c),
presupponiamo, siccome nel testo uno dei protagonisti fa un intervento relativo alle
dimensioni.

Amplification: un amplificazione non indispensabile tramite una glossa/parola, estendendo il

testo – da Malone.

Rootbeer: non abbiamo un'unica possibilità di traduzione, l'importante è minimizzare la perdita

del significato originale. Una traduzione foregnizing non sarebbe illegittima, tuttavia
consideriamo che non risulta importante mantenere la bevanda nel testo—“una bevanda color
marroncino”.

Nella traduzione è fondamentale capire chi sta parlando, alcuni termini hanno senso di essere
tradotti con precisione semantica, altri anche no.

Manilas: vongole (veraci)

Sculping: non abbiamo un traducente diretto—problema di traduzione. La soluzione più

foregnizing sarebbe mantenere “sculping” in corsivo; essendo un esserino tipico di un
particolare ecosistema ed essendo ben contestualizzato nel testo, lo inseriamo all'interno della
categoria della fauna marina. Nel testo se manteniamo sculping e poi lo facciamo seguire ad
una glossa esplicativa come “pesciolino” allora ci rende più naturale il mantenimento della
parola originale.

Hooters: termine più basso e colloquiale, quindi vorrebbe una traduzione analoga. Si tratta di
una prospettiva diversa rispetto a quella del protagonista, che tendenzialmente è più
composto, non si riferirebbe al seno in tal modo.

03/11/23

Malone's translation strategies

He presents 10 main strategies to translate at a structural and lexicogrammatical level,

although the 1st one dos not entail translation.

1. Carry-over matching: is obtained when the source element is not traslated into the L
but merely carried over as such into the TT.
 2. Equation and substitution: the first one is literal translation like loan words (relax,
weekend, stress); we can also finethe calques, the adaptation of the source word to the
morpho-phonological structure of the TT. --- is the one-to-one equivalent translation,
while being aware of the false friends in the source language. Substitution is the
opposite of the first methode, it occurs when literal translation is not possible (proverbs,
idioms).
3. Divergence and covergence: the first one refers to the choice of a suitable term from
a range of alternatives (relation one-to-many); the verb «girare» - to turn, to switch on,
to pass on, to twist, to circle…as well as «accountant» - ragioniere, ommercialista.
Convergence is the opposite (relation many-to-one) --- EN> IT, its divergence, IT> EN
conv.
4. Amplification: sometimes the SL takes for granted certain elements which are not
present in the TL, like cultural aspects, so the translator has to add some info in order to
make the translated text clear. It provides the target audience with extra explicit info
not required for the source audience. Notes, endnotes, footnotes are examples of
Amplification.
5. Reduction: omitting elements in the TL because they appear useless or even
misleading.
6. Diffusion and condensation: they might seem similar to amplification and reduction,
but there are relevant differences. Amplification and reduction refer to adding or
subtracting elements because they are helpful or superfluous. Diffusion and
condensation are concerned with more linguistically bound reasons, the differences
between languages and how they work – «locked» shoud be translated into «chiuso a
chiave», here we are using more elements; «to glance» -- «laciare un'occhiata». Same
vice versa. Condensation is the other way around, «far vedere»-- to show, «to make up
for»--compensare.
7. Reordering is similar with substitution but acts at a syntactical level
(reordering/inverting words). However, reordering is not always permitted. Examples on
file.

Malone also specifies 4 tags:

1) Matching: equation-sbstitution.
2) Zigzagging: divergence – convergenc.
3) Recrescence: amplification – reduction.
4) Repackaging: diffusion – condensation.
Reordering.

Look at the file.

Chapter 4

Vinay and Dalbernet’s model

Vinay and Dalbernet examined texts in both French and English, noting differences between the
two and identifying different translation «strategies» and «procedures».

Strategy:

An overall orientation of the translator (e.g. towards ‘free’ or ‘literal’ translation, towards the TT
or ST).

Procedure:

A specific technique or method used by the translator at a certain point in a text (e.g. the
borrowing of a word from the SL, the addition of an explanation or a footnote in the TT).
Direct translation (see “literal” translation)

 Borrowing
 Calque
 Literal translation

Oblique translation (see “free” translation)

 Transposition
 Modulation
 Equivalence

(1) Borrowing => The SL word is transferred directly to the TL (e.g. chic – déjà vu)

(2) Calque => A «special kind of borrowing» (1995:32-3) where the SL expression or structure
is transferred in a literal translation (e.g. the French science-fiction). These words and
expressions sometimes become integrated into the TL with some semantic change, which can
even turn them into false friends

(3) Literal translation => «Word-for-word» translation (e.g. This train arrives at ten => Ce
train arrive à 10 heures).

Literal translation is Vinay and Dalbernet’s prescriprion for good translation. BUT: the translator
may judge literal translation to be «unacceptable» for grammatical, syntactic or pragmatic
reasons (1995: 34-5)

When literal translation is not possible => oblique translation.

(4) Transposition: => a change of one part of speech for another (e.g. noun for verb) without
changing the sense

Obligatory (e.g. Dès son lever => As soon as he gets / got up.../Défense de fumer => No
smoking)

Optional (e.g. Lo sviluppo tecnologico ha consentito di ridurre i costi operativi/la riduzione dei
costi operativi => Technological development has enabled to reduce/the reduction of operating
costs)

Transposition is «(Vinay and Dalbernet 1995: 94).probably the most common structural change
undertaken by translators»

(5) Modulation: it changes the semantics of the text

Obligatory: the time when => le moment où

Optional: it is not difficult to show => il est facile de démontrer

Modulation is justified «when, although a literal translation results in a grammatically correct

utterance, it is considered unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL ( Vinay and Dalbernet
2004: 133).
(6) Equivalence/idiomatic translation: Languages describe the same situation by
different stylistic or structural means => Idioms, proverbs:
Comme un chien dans un jeu de quilles => Like a bull in a china shop.

(7) Adaptation involves changing the cultural reference when a situation in the
source culture does not exist in the target culture. Adaptation is a special kind of
equivalence => a situational equivalence
Example: an American father who returns home after a journey and kisses his
daughter on the mouth. That is something which is normal in that culture but which
would not be acceptable in a literal rendering into French (“He kissed his daughter on
the mouth” => “Il embrassa sa fille sur la bouche”)
A more appropriate translation would be: “Il embrassa sa fille sur la joue” or even “Il
serra tendrement sa fille dans ses bras”.

There are many other techniques exemplified by Vinay and Dalbernet Some of them
are:

1. Amplification and economy

2. Explicitation
3. Compensation
4. Generalization

1. The TL uses more words, often because of syntactic expansion:

He talked himself out of the job => Non si è aggiudicato il lavoro perché ha parlato
troppo. opposite: economy.

2. Implicit information in the ST is made explicit in the TT

Explicitation can occur at the level of grammar (e.g. «the doctor» in an
English ST is explicated as masculine or feminine in a TL where indication
of gender is essential), semantics (e.g. explanation of an ST cultural item
=> Thanksgiving.

3. Translation inevitably involves some loss: Paul Ricoeur uses an analogy

drawn from Freud's notions of a work of remembering and one of
mourning: a good translation must always acknowledge some loss, like a
bereavement that has to be worked through
A TT can however make up for the loss ( = compensation) by introducing
a gain at the same or another point in the text (e.g. the SL and the TL
have different forms of personal address: formal/informal).

4. The use of a more general word in the TT:

German bratwurst => English sausage.
Vinay and Darbelnet described another parameter: the difference between servitude
and option
Servitude: obligatory SL>TL shifts, due to the differences between the two language
systems (e.g. agua fría => cold water)
Option: non-obligatory shifts due to the translator’s own style and preferences, or to a
change in emphasis
The realm of stylistics should be the translator’s main concern: their role is “to choose
from among the available options to express the nuances of the message” (1995: 16).
Catford
Catford makes an important distinction between formal correspondence and textual
equivalence
A formal correspondent is «any TL category (…) which can be said to occupy, as nearly
as possible, the ‘same’ place in the ‘economy’ of the TL as the given SL category
occupies in the SL» (Catford 1965: 27)
A textual equivalent is «any TL text or portion of text which is observed on a particular
occasion… to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of text (ibid.)
Translation shifts are «departures from formal correspondence in the process of going
from the SL to the TL».

Catford considers two kinds of shift:

A shift of level is something which is expressed by grammar in one language and lexis
in another.
Example:
Trois touristes auraient été tués (French conditional) =>
Three tourists have been reported killed (English lexical item)

The category shift is subdivided into four kinds:

 Structural shifts: shifts in grammatical structure (e.g. I like jazz vs. A me

piace il jazz)
 Class shifts: e.g. a medical student vs. un étudiant en médécine
 Unit shift or rank shifts: e.g. a word in the ST becomes a phrase in the TT
 Intra-system shifts: e.g. number and article systems => advice vs. des
conseils.

Translation equivalence depends on communicative features such as function,

situation and culture rather than just on formal linguistic criteria.
Stylistic shifts have been investigated in more recent translation theory.
Why?

 Because of a greater interest in the intervention of the translator and

their relationship to the ST
 The development of new computerized tools to assist analysis.

Chapter 5

Reiss’s functional approach is based on the three functions of language by German

psychologist and linguist Karl Bühler (1879-1963):

 Informative function eg encyclopedia

 Expressive function eg novel
 Appellative function eg advertisements

Reiss’s work is important because it considers the communicative function of

translation
Recognition that the TT function can be different from the ST function, e.g. Gulliver’s
Travels (1726): satirical novel => entertaining novel
That recognition challenged the concept of equivalent effect as the main goal of
translation.

Why should there only be three types of language function?

Christiane Nord felt the need to add a fourth function taken from Roman Jakobson’s
categorization: phatic function (e.g. «Ladies and gentlemen»).

The «plain prose» translation method proposed for the informative text was
questioned. English business text, for instance, contain a large number of metaphors:
Markets are bullish or bearish; profits soar and plummet, etc.

The translatorial action model

Translatorial action focuses on producing a TT that is functionally communicative for
the receiver: the form and genre of the TT must be guided by what is functionally
suitable in the target culture.
The needs of the receiver are the determining factors for the TT.
Strengths: Translation is placed in its sociocultural context, including the relationship
between the translator and the initiator => It takes into account real commercial
translation constraints
Weaknesses: Cultural difference is not investigated in detail.

Skopos theory
‘Skopos’ = aim or purpose (of TT)
The term was introduced in the 1970s by Hans J. Vermeer (1930-2010)
Main work: Reiss and Vermeer’s Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie,
1984 => Towards a General Theory of Translational Action, 2013. Aim: a general
translation theory for all texts
The TT (‘Translatum’) must be fit for purpose and functionally adequate
Why is a ST translated? What is the function of the TT?

 A translational action is determined by its skopos = the TT is determined

by its skopos
 It is an offer of information in a target culture and target language
concerning an offer of information in a source culture and source
language = the ST and TT are related to their function in their linguistic
and cultural contexts
 A TT does not initiate an offer of information in a clearly reversible way =
the function of a TT in the target culture is not necessarily the same as
the ST in the source culture.
 A TT must be internally coherent*
 A TT must be coherent with the ST*
 The 5 rules above stand in a hierarchical order, with the skopos rule
predominating

*Internal textual coherence => the coherence rule (1)

*Intertextual coherence => the fidelity rule (2)
1. The TT must be interpretable as coherent with the TT receiver’s situation (Reiss and
Vermeer 2013:101) = the TT must make sense for the TT receivers: it must fit their
need => functional adequacy
2. There must be coherence between the TT and the ST, or more specifically between:

 The ST information received by the translator;

 The interpretation the translator makes of this information;
 The information that is encoded for the TT receivers
BUT: Reiss and Vermeer don not specify which type of coherence they are talking
about.
Criticism
Christiane Nord, another major functionalist: while «functionality is the most important
criterion for a translation» the translator does not have absolute licence (Nord 2005:
31-2).
Skopos theory does not pay sufficient attention to the linguistic nature of the ST.
Moreover, even if the skopos is fulfilled, it may be inadequate at the stylistic or
semantic levels of individual segments.
Christiane Nord tried to tackle this criticism with her model of translation-oriented text
analysis.

Nord’s Text Analysis in Translation (1988) presents a more detailed functional model
incorporating elements of text analysis.
First distinction between two types of translation product: documentary translation
and instrumental translation.

Documentary translation
“a document of a source culture communication between the author and the ST
recipient” (Nord 2005: 80)
Examples:
1) a literary translation where the TT allows the TT receiver access to the ideas of the
ST but where the reader is aware that it is a translation
2) An “exoticizing translation” that seeks to preserve local colour (ibid. :81).

Instrumental translation
‘is intended to fulfil its communicative purpose without the recipient being conscious
of reading or hearing a text which, in a different form, was used before in a different
communicative situation’ (Nord ibid.).
The TT receivers read the TT as though it were a ST written in their own language.
Example: a translated computer manual.

The importance of the translation commission – Nord

 The translation commission shoud give the following information for both
texts:
 The intended text functions
 The addressees (sender and recipient)
 The time and place of text reception
  The medium (speech/writing, digital/hard copy)
 The motive (why the ST was written and why it is being translated)

The functional hierarchy of translation problems (1&2)

Top-down hierarchy:

 Comparison of the intended functions of the ST and the TT helps to

decide the functional type of translation to be produced: documentary or
instrumental
 Analysis of the translation commission determines which functional
elements can be reproduced and which need to be adapted to the TT
receiver’s situation.
 Translation style
o Documentary translation: source-culture oriented
o Instrumental translation: target-culture oriented

 4. The problems of the text can then be tackled at a lower linguistic level

Gobetti file (6pg)

Michael Halliday’s model of discourse analysis

It is based on systemic functional linguistics (SFL) = the study of language as
communication
SFL sees meaning in the writer’s choices and systematically relates these choices to
the text’s function in a wider sociocultural framework
Interrelation between linguistic choices, aims of the communication and sociocultural
framework.

Juliane House’s model of translation quality assessment

House’s model is based on comparative ST-TT analysis aimed at assessing the quality
of translation and highlighting «mismatches» or «errors».
The latest model (2015) draws on Halliday’s Register analysis of Field, Tenor and Mode
for both the ST and the TT.

Register is influenced by three variables of the situational context:

 Field refers to the subject matter

 Tenor includes «the addresser’s temporal, geographical and social
provenance as well as their intellectual, emotional or affective stance
(their ‘personal viewpoint’)» (2015:64). Social attitude = style =>
formal/informal
  Mode relates to «channel» (spoken/written…) and the degree of
participation between addresser and addressee => connectivity
(monologue, dialogue…).

Overt translation
The TT does not pretend to be (and is not represented as being) an original and is
clearly not directed at the TT audience.
Example: literary texts, which are tied to their source culture

Covert translation
‘is a translation which enjoys the status of an original source text in the target culture’
(House 2015: 56)
ST and TT address their respective receivers directly
Example: a tourist information brochure
The function of a covert translation is “to recreate, reproduce or represent in the
translated text the function the original has in its discourse world.” It does this without
taking the TT reader into the discourse world of the ST. Equivalence is necessary at the
level of genre and of the text function.
Cultural filter: the translator needs to apply a “cultural filter” to give the impression
that the TT is an original => e.g. differences in business communication
(factual/interpersonal).

Mona Baker
Baker focuses on thematic structure.
Thematic structures relates to order of elements and information structure and is
realized differently in different languages.
Awareness of the relative markedness of thematic and information structure.

Baker’s considers various aspects of pragmatic equivalence in translation

Pragmatics is the study of language in use. It is the study of meaning, not as
generated by the linguistic system but as conveyed and manipulated by participants
in a communicative situation (Baker 2018: 235)
Three major pragmatic concepts:

 Coherence (1)
 Presupposition (2)
 Implicature (3)
 1. The coherence of a text “depends on the hearer’s or receiver’s
expectations and experience of the world (Baker 2018: 237).

These may not be the same for the ST and TT reader.

The Bard/The Fab Four => TT readers might not understand the link, so
the TT may need to make it explicit.

2. Presupposition is related to coherence. Baker: «pragmatic inference».

Presupposition concerns the linguistic and extralinguistic knowledge the
sender assumes the receiver to have or which are necessary in order to
understand the sender’s message
Example: 1999 => European Parliament => Sir Leon Brittan’s phrase
«Let me now turn to bananas» presupposes that the receiver knows
about the then current dispute between the EU and the US over banana
imports.

3. Implicature is another form of pragmatic inference: «what the speaker

means or implies rather than what he/she says» (Baker 2018: 240) =>
«You two seem very happy together»
The concept of implicature was developed by philosopher of language
Paul Grice (1913-1988).

Paul Grice’s maxims

Grice developed a set of «maxims» that operate in normal co-operative conversation

(Grice 1975)

o Quantity: give the necessary amount of information

o Quality: say only what you know to be true or what you can support
o Relevance: what you say should be relevant to the conversation
o Manner: say what you need to say in a way that is appropriate to the
message you wish to convey and which will normally be understood
o Politeness: be polite.

Criticism on House
Juliane House’s model: «mismatches» between ST and TT may indicate translation
errors, but also the application of translation strategies such as explicitation or
compensation.

Chapter 7
The polysystem theory
Polysystem = ‘a multiple system, a system of various systems which intersect with
each other and partly overlap, using concurrently different options, yet functioning as
one structured whole, whose members are interdependent’ (Even-Zohar 2005: 3).
The intersection and the overlapping of these systems occur in a dynamic hierarchy,
changing according to the historical moment.

The position of translated literature is not fixed. It may occupy a primary or secondary
position in the polysystem.

Primary position
Primary: «It participates actively in shaping the centre of the polysystem (Even-Zohar
1978: 163)
It is innovatory and linked to major events of literary history. Leading writers produce
important translations, which are a leading factor in the formation of new models for
the target culture => new poetics, new techniques.
3 examples on file.

Secondary positions
If translated literature assumes a secondary position, it represents a peripheral system
within the polysystem and has no major influence. It can even become conservative,
preserving conventional forms according to Even-Zohar, the secondary position is the
«normal» one for translated literatures.
Even-Zohar suggests that the position occupied by translated literatures influences
the translation strategy.

Primary position and translation strategy

Primary: translations are more inclined to break conventions and thus produce a TT
that is a close match to the ST in terms of adequacy. The influence of the foreign
language model may itself lead to the production of new models in the TL.

Secondary position and translation strategy

Translators tend to use existing target-culture models for the TT and produce more
«non-adequate» translations.

Toury and Descriptive Translation Studies

Toury tried to develop a general theory of translation: Descriptive Translation Studies –
and Beyond.
Translations occupy a position in the social and literary systems of the target culture
=> they are «facts of target cultures».

1) Situate the text within the target culture system, looking at its significance or
acceptability
2) Undertake a textual analyss of the ST and the TT in order to identify relationships
betwen corresponding segments in the two texts => coupled pairs. Identification of
obligatory and non-obligatory translation shifts
3) Attempt generalizations about the patterns identified in the two texts.

This methodology is replicable: it has to be repeated for other pairs of texts: the
corpus extends and a descriptive profile of translations can be built according to
genre, period, author…
The ultimate aim is to distinguish trends of translation behaviour and to make
generalizations regarding the decision-making of translators.

Rules, supported by legislation, are the strongest constraints => legal consequences
Example: in a professional translation context, the breaking of a confidentiality
agreement, or a gross grammatical error.

Norms are generally agreed forms of behaviour and are partly prescriptive, but
weaker than rules.
Example: writing a very informal translation commentary in an academic setting.

How to reconstruct norms

Norms that have been applied in the translation of a text can be reconstructed from
two sources:
1) From the examination of texts, which will reveal «regularities of behaviour»
2) From the statements made by translators, publishers, etc.

Different kinds of norms:

The basic initial norm refers to a general choice made by translators. Translators can
follow the norms realized in the ST, then the TT will be adequate, or follow the target
culture/language norms, and the TT will be acceptable.
Adequacy and acceptability are on a continuum: shifts are inevitable. Shifts can be
obligatory (see. Vinay and Darbelnet’s servitude) or non-obligatory (see option). The
latter are more interesting as they reveal the choices made by the translator.

Preliminary norms are: translation policy and directness of translation

Translation policy concerns the selection of texts for translation in a specific language,
context and time
Directness of translation relates to whether translation occurs via an intermediate
language.

Operational norms:
Matricial norms have to to with omission, addition or relocation of passages, with the
addition of footnotes…
Textual-linguistic norms concern the selection of TT linguistic material (lexical items,
syntactic and stylistic features…).

Toury’s aim was to identify norms so as to formulate probabilistic “laws” of translation

Two laws of translation:

1. Law of growing standardization: Disruption of the ST patterns in translation

and selection of linguistic options that are more common in the TL => tendency
towards a general standardization and loss of variation in style in the TT.
This is especially the case when the translation is in secondary position.
2. Law of interference: Interference from ST to TT.
Interference can be negative when it creates abnormal TT patterns
(calques)
Interference can be positive when ST features are adopted by the
translator without creating abnormal TT patterns

Chapter 8
The phrase “cultural turn” indicates this new orientation and binds together the
various case studies in Bassnett and Lefevere’s collection of essays.
These include studies of changing standards in translation over time, the power
exercised in and on the publishing industry in pursuit of specific ideologies, feminist
writing and translation, translation as “appropriation”, translation and colonization,
translation as rewriting.

The literary system in which translation operates is controlled by two factors:

1) Professionals within the literary system, who partly determine the dominant poetics:
critics, reviewers, academics, translators
2) Patronage outside the literary system, which partly determines the ideology:
powerful individuals, groups (publishers, the media…), institutions (national
academics, academic journals, the educational establishment).

Patronage is characterized by three components:

 The ideological component has to do with the choice of subjects and the
form of their presentation
 The economic component has to do with the payment or writers and
translators
 The status component has to do with the return for economic payment:
the beneficiary is expected to conform to the patron’s expectations.

Patronage has most influence in determining the ideology, whereas professionals have
most influence in determinig the poetics.
Lefevere analyses two components in dominant poetics:
1) Literary devices: genres, narrative plots, characters, theme, discourse, etc.
2) The concept of the role of literature: concerning the relation of literature to the
social system in which it exists.

According to Lefevere, ideology and poetics prevail upon and dictate the translation
strategy and the solution to specific problems.

Example:
The 1947 Dutch edition of Anne Frank’s diary, «rewritten» by Anne’s father Otto, alters
the image of the girl => her sexuality. Unflattering descriptions of friends and family
disappear
The 1950 German translation was done by a friend of Otto’s and contains errors of
comprehension and/or alterations with regard to the image of Germans => derogatory
remarks are toned down
Ideological pressures.

Postcolonial translation theory

Postcolonialism is generally used to cover studies of the history of the former colonies,
of powerful European empires, of the resistance to the colonialist powers and of the
effect of the imbalance of power relations between colonized and colonizer.
Spivak concerns about the ideological consequences of the translation of «Third
World» literature into English and the distortion this entails.

Spivak speaks out against western feminists, who expect non-European feminist
writing to be translated into English, the language of power.
These translations are often written in «translatese», which eliminates the identity of
less powerful individuals and cultures => standardized language.
In Postcolonial Translation (1999) Susan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi talk about a
«shameful history of translation»: translation played an active role in the colonization
process, spreading ideological images of colonized peoples.

Other perspectives on translation and ideology

Some research has focused on manipulations in the TT that may be indicative of the
translator’s conscious ideology or produced by “ideological” elements of the
translation environment such as pressure from a commissioner, editor o institution.
Manipulation may of course be due to censorship in authoritarian regimes.

Chapter 9
The Translator’s Invisibility
Invisibility is produced:
1) By the way translators themselves tend to translate «fluently» into English, to
produce an idiomatic and «readable» TT => «illusion of transparency».
2) By the way the translated texts are typically read in the target culture.

Illusion of transparency
A translated text, whether prose or poetry, fiction or nonfiction, is judged acceptable
by most publishers, reviewers, and readers when it reads fluently, when the absence
of any linguistic or stylistic peculiarities makes it seem transparent, giving the
appearance that it reflects the foreign writer’s personality or intention or the essential
meaning of the foreign text—the appearance, in other words, that the translation is
not in fact a translation, but the “original.” (Venuti 2018: 1)

The reasons behind invisibility

1) The «prevailing concept of authorship»
2) Translation is seen as derivative and of secondary quality and importance.
So the tendency since Dryden has been to conceal the act of translation.

Domestication and foreignization

The notion of invisibility goes hand in hand with 2 types of
translation: Domestication and foreignization, which concern the choice of the texts to
translate
the translation method.

Origin: Schleiermacher (1813).

Venuti sees domestication as dominating British and American translation culture. He

criticizes domestication since it involves “an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text
to receiving cultural values”. This entails translating in a transparent, fluent “invisible”
style in order to minimize the foreignness of the TT.
Foreignization «entails choosing a foreign text and developing a translation method
along lines which are excluded by dominant cultural values in the target language»
(Venuti 1998: 242)
It is the preferred choice of Schleiermacher: «The translator leaves the writer in peace,
as much as possible, and moves the reader toward [the writer]» (1813: 49)
According to Venuti, foreignizing practices are a «highly desirable… strategic cultural
intervention» => non-fluent, estranging or heterogeneous translation style designed
to make visible the presence of the translator and to highlight the foreign identity of
the ST.

Domestication and foreignization are not binary opposites, but part of a continuum
and relate to ethical choices made by the translator:
“The terms ‘domestication’ and ‘foreignization’ indicate fundamentally ethical
attitudes towards a foreign text and culture, ethical effects produced by the choice of
a text for translation and by the strategy devised to translate it, whereas the terms
like ‘fluency’ and ‘resistancy’ indicate fundamentally discursive features of translation
strategies in relation to the reader’s cognitive processing.” (Venuti 2018: 19)
No translation can be entirely foreignizing: “all translation (…) is an interpretation that
fundamentally domesticates the source text”.

Antoine Berman
Venuti was influenced by French theorist Antoine Berman (1942-1991) and by his
L’épreuve de l’étranger (The Experience of the Foreign, 1992)
Why «épreuve»?
1) For the target culture in experiencing the strangeness of the foreign text and word
2) For the foreign text in being uprooted from its original context.

Berman deplores the tendency to negate the foreign in translation by the strategy of
«naturalization» => Venuti’s domestication
«The properly ethical aim of the translating act» is «receiving the Foreign as foreign»
(Berman 1985: 241) => Venuti’s foreignization
System of textual deformation in the TT that prevents the foreign from emerging.

His examination of the forms of textual deformation is called «negative analytic»:

«The negative analytic is primarily concerned with ethnocentric, annexationist
translations and hypertextual translations (pastiche, imitation, adaptation, free
writing), where the play of deforming forces is freely exercised» (Berman 1985: 242)
Berman’s 12 «deforming tendencies»
1)RATIONALIZATION entails the modification of syntactic structures including
punctuation and sentence structure and order => see translations of Dostoevskij
which simplify complex sentences
2)CLARIFICATION includes explicitation of the implicit (what if the text was
intentionally unclear?)
3)EXPANSION entails additions aimed at clarifying => overtranslation => longer TTs
4)ENNOBLEMENT refers to some translators’ tendency to improve on the original,
rewriting it in a more elegant style.

5)QUALITATIVE IMPOVERISHMENT: replacement of words and expressions with lack-

luster and less «iconic» TT equivalents (iconic = whose form and sound are associated
with their sense)
6)QUANTITATIVE IMPOVERISHMENT: loss of lexical variation in translation.
Example: Spanish ST => semblante, rostro, cara vs. English TT => face
7) THE DESTRUCTION OF RHYTHMS: in novels and poetry
8) THE DESTRUCTION OF UNDERLYING NETWORKS OF SIGNIFICATION:
Text => textus => unit of sense, network of meaning; subtext; hidden meanings
9) THE DESTRUCTION OF LINGUISTIC PATTERNINGS:
The ST may be systematic in its sentence constructions and patternings.
10) THE DESTRUCTION OF VERNACULAR NETWORKS OR THEIR EXOTICIZATION relates
to local language patterns or culture-specific items.
If they are erased => loss
If the translator looks for a TL vernacular or slang equivalent => ridiculous
exoticization of the foreign
Example: Australian farmer who speaks Bavarian.

11) THE DESTRUCTIONS OF EXPRESSIONS AND IDIOMS: the replacement of an idiom

or proverb by its TL «equivalent» is an «ethnocentrism»
Example: Joseph Conrad’s novel The Arrow of Gold => set in 1870s Marseille, it opens
with a Carnival scene: «There was a touch of bedlam in all this»
The word «bedlam» refers to the hospital of St Mary of Bethlehem which was devoted
to treating the mentally ill in the 1400s. Over time, the pronunciation of Bethlehem
morphed into bedlam and the term is now a byword for pandemonium
The word bedlam should not be translated with a French equivalent => Charenton, a
similar institution
12) THE EFFACEMENT OF THE SUPERIMPOSITION OF LANGUAGES: it concerns the way
translation tends to erase traces of different forms of language that co-exist in the ST.
Example: mix of American English and Latin American Spanish in the work of Latino
writers

Venuti: the weakness of the translator

Literary translators work from contract to contract, for a usually modest fee, with the
publishers initiating most translations and seeking to minimize translation costs. No
copyright/royalties => weakness
Peter Fawcett’s «Translation and power play» (1995: 189): this amounts to a power
play, with the final product often determined by editors and publishers =>
domesticating translation: a translation should «read well» in the TL.