According to The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English for Advanced Learners’ definition, to translate means “to change written or spoken words into another language” (1). The translator aims to provide an equivalent version of an original text for a target audience, meaning it should sound natural in the target language and fit the target culture, but with as little change as possible in original meaning and intention (Soh Tatcha 504). Traditional translation between a source language (L1) and a target language (L2) implies that both the original and the translated texts are monolingual, and that non-verbal elements are insignificant features, rather than elements that need to be taken into consideration (Voellmer and Zabalbeascoa 237). …show more content…
On the one hand, she assumes that when foreign dialogues are not subtitled, and based on the assumption that the English-speaking characters only speak their mother tongue, both the characters and the English-speaking viewers find themselves in the same position where they have to deduce the meaning from gestures and facial expressions (Ibid). In other words, they both need to rely on contextual translation, meaning that “the overall context of the scene and the non-verbal information (images, sounds, etc.) help viewers draw the meaning of what they see on screen” (Meylaerts and Serban 11). The film thereby stages a communication situation in which conversations are not subtitled, as would be the case in real life. The co-existence of different languages within a film might seem to equate with openness to different cultures and suggest that all languages are equally meaningful, but this would not always be the case (Mingant 718). The lack of subtitles “entails a certain ideological positioning”: the English-speaking audience tends to side with the English-speaking characters since they understand their language and culture, whereas the foreign speaker is automatically seen as “the Other” (Ibid 717). The absence of translation also very often renders a sense of
Ted Chiang’s “Story of Your Life” is a short science fiction story that explores the principals of linguistic relativity through in interesting relationship between aliens and humans that develops when aliens, known as Heptapods, appear on Earth. In the story Dr. Louise Banks, a linguist hired by the government to learn the Heptapods language, tells her unborn daughter what she has learned from the Heptapods as a result of learning their language. M. NourbeSe Philip’s poem “Discourse on the Logic of Language” also explores the topic of language and translations, as she refers to different languages as her “mother tongue” or “father tongue.” Although these two pieces of literature may not seem to have much in common both explore the topics of language and translation and connect those ideas to power and control.
In Gloria Anzaldúa’s “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, an excerpt from her book Borderlands/La Fronter in 1987, she demonstrates that identity can be asserted through language. You can tell a lot about a person by their language. Language is your way of representing who you are as a person, and most importantly, your culture. Culture defines the most about a person. Anzaldúa shares her aggravation of not being able to speak her language, “until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself" (Anzaldúa 378). Being seen as an individual of English as Second Language (ESL), Anzaldúa does not appreciate how she has to assist in translating to English or Spanish, where she would rather speak Spanglish. “[A]s long as I have to accommodate the English speaker rather than having them accommodate me, my tongue will be illegitimate” (Anzaldúa 378). Talking bad about her language severely impacts her identity, “I am my language” (Anzaldúa 378). A person’s identity should not be seen less because of the language they speak. Anzaldúa states that she will have her voice, though she cannot express her passion for her language with the restraint of no freedom act to embrace it, she will. Her audiences that she is reaching to are those who share the same struggle of their identities just like her, and also speaking out to people who do look down upon people like her because of where she is form and what language she speaks.
In her narrative Mother Tongue, Amy Tan speaks of how the English language has shaped her life, drawing from personal experiences in her early life, to her daily use of English in the present. Tan begins her narrative by identifying her own “mother tongue”, which is simply the broken English her mother uses and has been accustomed to. Tan says that due to her mother’s broken English some are unable to understand her, thereby limiting Tan’s mother to function properly in our English speaking society. Tan shows the reader how her feelings toward her mother tongue have changed throughout her life drawing out a personal experience from her adolescence.
In the story “Mother Tongue,” by Amy Tan, Mrs. Tan talks about (in the book) her life and how she grew up with different Englishes was very hard and how it has affected her today. The setting of the book goes from being at lecture to the past of Amy Tan and her mother along with the different Englishes she had to come accustomed to. In “Mother Tongue” by Amy Tan, the author’s attitude towards the “different Englishes” she grew up with is fascinated. Amy Tan conveys this attitude through wanting to learn all different kinds of Englishes, her use of Englishes in her novel, and the acceptance she developed of her mother’s broken English.
Purpose, context, audience, and persona are all important factors that affect a rhetorical situation. An article that contained these effective factors to strengthen their argument was Amy Tan’s personal narrative essay, Mother Tongue. Throughout her essay, she utilizes charged language to communicate her ideas in a powerful way as introduced in Newman and Genevieve Birk’s Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language. Amy Tan is an Asian American writer who is known for her exploration of cultural differences between Chinese mothers and their daughters. In her article, she delves into what she considers her various forms and types of English she uses in different environments and how there is a prominent distinction between her own personal emphasis on English language varied to her mother.
Frequently in "Feminist Political and Social Thought" taught at SUNY Albany, by Dr. J. Hobson, I found myself simultaneously inspired and frustrated by the theory we were assigned to read. Authors such as bell hooks, Uma Narayan, Ann Russo, Kimberly Crenshaw, Andy Smith, John Stoltenberg, and Judy Baca did such wonderful jobs of pointing out the problems of perspective that stymie the feminist movement from achieving its goal to facilitate the bonding of the oppressed across differences, in order to overcome all oppressions. Unfortunately when combing through these authors intricately written, often jargon-ridden words, it was difficult to make practical sense of their insights. I understood what many of them were saying and in many cases I couldn't agree more, only I could barley imagine how these theories might be applied to real life scenarios. Furthermore, it was difficult for me to see how much of this would come to any use-say the next time someone made a racist, homophobic, Western-centric, sexist comment at work, or at the Thanksgiving dinner table for that matter. How could I possibly communicate the things that had been discussed in the classroom, laced with words like paradigm, praxis, pedagogy, and a completely deconstructed concept of the word "culture"? All these things would need an introduction of their own-and that may work in a classroom-but rarely in a conversation!
The scene is always the same: the three of us sitting in a room together, talking. I see her from the corner of my eye, glancing for only a second or two, but always long enough to notice the look on her face, the expression I’ve become so painfully familiar with over the years. I am forced to turn away; the conversation resumes. She is a few feet from us. She hears everything, and understands nothing except what she can gather from the expressions on our faces, the tone of our voices. She pretends not to be bothered, smiling at us and interjecting random questions or comments in Chinese—a language I was raised to speak, a language I’ve slowly forgotten over the years, a language that is now mine only by blood. It is an earnest but usually futile attempt to break through the invisible barrier that separates her from us, and in spite of all her efforts to hide it, that sad, contem...
Tan includes a direct quote from her mother in paragraph six of the reading, and she does not shorten it for an important reason. Tan decides to keep the entire quote instead of paraphrasing to add an effect that a reader can only understand with the full quote. It shows that even though some people speak the language of English it is hard for others to understand based on the person’s full understanding and comprehension of the language. In Tan’s case she is used to the way her mother speaks and uses the language, but to others it is almost impossible to understand. If it were not for Tan summarizing what the quote meant before putting it in the text, few readers would have understood what the mother was trying to convey with her use of the language. Tan’s strategy in including this direct quotation is to show that language differs from person to person even if they all speak the same language. She is implying that the whole world could speak English; however, it would not be the same type of English because of how everyone learns and how others around
English is an invisible gate. Immigrants are the outsiders. And native speakers are the gatekeepers. Whether the gate is wide open to welcome the broken English speakers depends on their perceptions. Sadly, most of the times, the gate is shut tight, like the case of Tan’s mother as she discusses in her essay, "the mother tongue." People treat her mother with attitudes because of her improper English before they get to know her. Tan sympathizes for her mother as well as other immigrants. Tan, once embarrassed by her mother, now begins her writing journal through a brand-new kaleidoscope. She sees the beauty behind the "broken" English, even though it is different. Tan combines repetition, cause and effect, and exemplification to emphasize her belief that there are more than one proper way (proper English) to communicate with each other. Tan hopes her audience to understand that the power of language- “the way it can evoke an emotion, a visual image, a complex idea, or a simple truth”- purposes to connect societies, cultures, and individuals, rather than to rank our intelligence.
The author’s diction heightens the confusion and difficulties the English language evokes, as her simple method of communication progressively becomes more complicated. Words are “sifting” around solely as “vocabulary words” it becomes difficult for her to connect and understand this “closed” language. The author learned Spanish during her childhood through past memories and experiences which helped her form a closer knit bond to the language as a whole; however, English does not root any deep connections for her causing her to doubt the importance of words. The negative connotation when she refers to vocabulary words and closed is due to the fact that she is frustrated with her inability to communicate exactly what she perceives as they are not connected to experiences. Similarly, the language seems “frail” and essentially “bottled up” as she is unable to express her thoughts in a manner other than exclusive “translations”. Unlike Spanish, English seems to have a complicated and confusing aspect tied to it where the author is feels trapped because she cannot convey her emotions or relate to it culturally. The repetitions of these words that have a negative connotation draw out the significance behind communication and the true value of connecting to a culture. Overall, the dictio...
Tan was born to a pair of Chinese immigrants. Her mother understood English extremely well, but the English she spoke was “broken.”(36) Many people not familiar with her way of speaking found it very difficult to understand her. As a result of this, Tan would have to pretend to be her mother, and she called people up to yell at them while her mother stood behind her and prompted her. This caused Tan to be ashamed of her mother throughout her youth, but as she grew, she realized that the language she shares with her mother is a “language of intimacy” (36) that she even uses when speaking with her husband.
...xpressing her Chinese culture. Mastering a second language allows her to articulate her and her mother’s thoughts; it is a foundation for her pride and a foundation to express herself. For Gloria Anzaldua, instead of choosing one language over the other, she chose a mix of the two and fights for it. She realized the value of her language when she lost it and now treasures it. The kind of Spanish she speaks is neither English nor Spanish, but both. It is overflowing with culture from Medieval Spain, France, Germany, etc., just from the origins of the words. It is her pride and a representation of herself, fighting and living. In conclusion, in addition to Lera Boroditsky’s article proving that the structure of language affects how we think, the articles by Eric Liu, Amy Tan, and Gloria Anzaldua show how language is a foundation for a person’s culture, pride, and self.
The movie Babel (2006), directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, is an interesting and impressive film. This movie shows four different episodes, which are all related to each other. This movie is about the relationship between stereotypes and communications of people, and the way the film discusses the topic to the audience is very interesting, because there are many episodes. There are four episodes in this film; first is Susan and Richard’s story, second is Yusef’s episode, third one is Amelia’s episode, and the last one is Chieko’s story.
The translation process may seem easy to them who don't have to deal regularly with it, but after a little exercise anyone could realize the amount of problems rize even just from the translation of a single word. In fact languages are not a list of tags that simply name the categories of the world; each language organizes the world in a different way and the meaning and value of the words varies in relation to their cultural and social system.
One of the most important concepts in Translation Studies is equivalence put forward by Eugene Nida (1964). There are two types of equivalent relationship between the source and the target texts according to him, formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on reproducing the surface structure, i.e. form and content of the source message. On the other hand, dynamic equivalence emphasizes equivalent effect, which implies that translators should aim to produce a similar response in the target audience to that in the source audience. However, scholars have criticized the concept of equivalent effect for being too vague. Moreover, it is almost impossible to create equivalent effect for readers from a different culture. ()