Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto
Línguas e Literaturas Modernas
INTRODUCTION TO TRANSLATION
STUDIES
Power Point 8
24 October 2007
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
TASK (from Lesson 11)
Search the net to find out more about
Bible translation. What was the original
language in which the Bible was written?
Which language was the Bible first
translated into ?
Remember to note down the websites
where you found your answers.
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
To achieve his scientific approach
to T, Nida resorts to linguistics:
• Semantics (structural semantics)
• Pragmatics (language in use)
• Noam Chomsky’s generativetransformational grammar
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
A NEW CONCEPT OF (BIBLE)
TRANSLATING
Old Focus: the form of the message
NEW FOCUS:
The new focus, however, has shifted from the the form
of the message to the response of the receptor. (. . .)
Even the old question: Is this a correct translation?
must be answered in terms of another question, namely:
For whom? Correctness must be determined by the
extent to which the average reader for which a
translation is intended will be likely to understand it
correctly.
(Nida and Taber 1969: 1)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Main innovations:
• Pragmatic view of meaning: a word acquires
•
•
•
meaning in a specific communication context
Referential (denotative or “dictionary” meaning)
and connotative (emotive) meaning (emotional
response evoked in the reader).
Componential analysis (e.g., anthropology:
mapping of kinship terms in different cultures)
Semantic structure analysis
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Noam Chomsky (1928) (MIT)
http://www.chomsky.info/
http://web.mit.edu/linguistics/www/chomsky.home.html
• Syntactic Structures, 1957
Language is a system with underlying universal
structures (kernel sentences) which become
visible through surface structures.
A limited n. of rules creates an infinite n. of
utterances (mathematical model) by means of
transformations.
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Nida and Taber 1969: 39
These restructured expressions are basically
what many linguists call “kernels”; that is to say,
they are the basic structural elements out of
which the language builds its elaborate surface
structure. In fact, one of the most important
insights coming from “transformational
grammar” is the fact that in all languages there
are half a dozen to a dozen basic structures out
of which all the more elaborate formations are
constructed by means of so-called
“transformations.”
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
What interests Nida and Taber, however, is
back-transformation, because if we can
reduce surface structures to kernel
sentences, then the “transfer” into the
other language will be easier.
“This is one justification for the claim that
the three-stage process of translation is
preferable (. . .)” (ibidem, p.40)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
3 stages: (1) analysis, in which the surface structure (i.e., the
message as given in language A) is analyzed in terms of (a) the
grammatical relationships and (b) the meaning of the words and
combinations of the words, (2) transfer, in which the analyzed
material is transferred in the mind of the translator from
language A to language B, and (3) restructuring, in which the
transferred material is restructured in order to make the final
message fully acceptable in the receptor language.
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Formal equivalence
“Formal equivalence focuses attention on the
message itself, in both form and content … “
Nida 1964: 159
It is “basically source oriented; that is, it is
designed to reveal as much as possible of the
form and content of the original message” (165)
e.g., gloss translations (T is close to original in
terms of structure)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Dynamic equivalent and the
principle of equivalent effect
. . . What one must determine is the
response of the receptor to the translated
message. This response must then be
compared with the way in which the
original receptors presumably reacted to
the message when it was given in its
original setting. (Nida and Taber 1969: 1)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Dynamic equivalence is therefore to be defined
in terms of the degree to which the receptors of
the message in the receptor language respond
to it in substiantially the same manner as the
receptors in the source language. This response
can never be identical, for the cultural and
historical settings are too different, but there
should be a high degree of equivalence of
response, or the translation will have failed to
accomplish its purpose.
(Nida and Taber 1969: 24)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Criticisms levelled at Nida
• Approach still focuses too much on word
level
• Reader response is difficult, if not
impossible, to measure (Newmark, House,
van den Broeck)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
Newmark’s semantic and
communicative translation
These T methods are set out in two
books:
Approaches to Translation (1981)
A Textbook of Translation (1988)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
SEMANTIC TRANSLATION
Similar to Nida’s formal equivalence;
• SL emphasis;
• It takes more account of the aesthetic
value of the SL text, compromising on
meaning where appropriate;
• It is used for expressive texts
Newmark 1988: 46-47
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
COMMUNICATIVE TRANSLATION
Communicative translation attempts to render the
exact contextual meaning of the original in such
a way that both content and language are
readily acceptable and comprehensible to the
readership.
[It is used] for ‘informative’ and ‘vocative’ texts.
[It] tends to be simple, clear and brief, and is
always written in a natural and resourceful style.
Newmark 1988: 47-48
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006
HOMEWORK (for 31 Oct.)
Jeremy Munday
• Chapter 4 (special attention to Vinay and
Darbelnet)
Elena Zagar Galvão - ITS - FLUP
2006