Translation Analysis
Since there is no a definitive translation of any text, multiple translations can allow us to conceive the original text (even though we don’t know the language of the source text). "The study of multiple translations substantially enlarges the interpretive process and perspectives that readers draw from the text" (Schulte 1994). In other words, comparing various translations of the same text as in (Charles Baudelaire Correspondence, A Multiple Reading of Rainer Maria Rilke 's “The Panther”, Gaius Valerius Catullus, and Gustave Flaubert, “Madame Bovary”) provide us with a clear understanding of the different perspective of the translators. For me, this comes as no surprise, because each translator has a different technique
…show more content…
Clearly enough, the above translations are not all exactly the same, nor are completely different. Some translators in their translations stick for a literal word-for-word translation of the source text, as in the Trot while, others take a freer style. Adding to that, the multiple translations show us how the personal imagination of the translators impacts their interpretation. That is, within the translation process the translators affected directly with their personal perception and visualization of selecting the appropriate meaning of the original text. Therefore, personal perception plays a significant role in choosing a particular word as well as in decision making. As a result, it leads to a slight change in terms of a visual, connotative, or semantic meaning of the target text. All in all, different translations may reflect different versions of the source text based on their …show more content…
i.e. when the translator encountered polysemy; each one had selected a different English word. To be more specific, when we look closely and compare the six translations of the Gustave Flaubert, “Madame Bovary”, to a certain word like “manœuvre” in the original text. It has been translated to various meanings, such as ritual, trick, game, maneuver, trick, and trick. Also, it is very interesting to note that three of the translators sticked with the word “trick”, and the other translators picked different words. Nonetheless, if we consulted a French-English dictionary, we find the following: action, artifice, dodge, intrigue, machination, move, movement, plan, plot, ploy, ruse, scheme, stratagem, subterfuge, maneuver, tactic, trick. If we check the etymology of the word “manœuvre” the result will be the following: “From Middle French manÅ“uvre (“manipulation, maneuver") and manÅ“uvrer (“to maneuver"), from Old French manovre (“handwork, manual labour"), from Medieval Latin manopera, manuopera (“work done by hand, handwork"), from manu (“by hand") + operari (“to work"). First recorded in the Capitularies of Charlemagne (800 CE) to mean "chore, manual task", probably as a calque of the Frankish *handwerc (“hand-work"). Compare Old English handweorc, handÄ¡eweorc, German Handwerk.” Looking
Martin B. Shichtman, in his essay on Wace and Layamon, describes history as "the transcribing of the illusions of an age" (1987, 106). He states that for many scholars in the Middle Ages, translating histories was not so much a matter of setting down, word for word, what were considered to be "hard facts," but of expounding on the truths behind the material, as they were relevant to the time and audience for which they were written. This often involved the omission of some material from the primary source, the addition of new material to it, and the reinterpretation of events and attitudes expressed in the work.
Deep-seated in these practices is added universal investigative and enquiring of acquainted conflicts between philosophy and the art of speaking and/or effective writing. Most often we see the figurative and rhetorical elements of a text as purely complementary and marginal to the basic reasoning of its debate, closer exploration often exposes that metaphor and rhetoric play an important role in the readers understanding of a piece of literary art. Usually the figural and metaphorical foundations strongly back or it can destabilize the reasoning of the texts. Deconstruction however does not indicate that all works are meaningless, but rather that they are spilling over with numerous and sometimes contradictory meanings. Derrida, having his roots in philosophy brings up the question, “what is the meaning of the meaning?”
Throughout the past two hundred years, many linguists have attempted to translate Dante Alighieri's Divine Comedy into English. While all have been successful in conveying the general meaning of various passages, diction and wordiness have varied wildly; no two translations are identical. This can be attributed to two factors: normal translational variation and the intent of the linguist. Taking both of these into account, John Ciardi's 1954 translation is far superior to the others.
Translation is a linguistic science, but it occurs within a theological and moral framework. The issue is a sensitive one, as theology involves an obligation to the text and morality involves an obligation to the
First, Trudgill demonstrates the transition of the word “aggravate”. Aggravate come from the Latin word “aggravare”, which means ‘to make heavier’. English borrowed this word and the definition became ‘to make more serious’. Now the common definition of “aggravate” is to ‘irritate’. Trudgill goes on to give another example of the word “nice”. “Nice comes from the ancient Indo-European word “skei” meaning ‘cut’ (skei” came from the Latin word “scire” which is ‘to know’ or to ‘be able to distinguish one thing from another’) and “ne” meaning ‘no’. The two words were combined into “nescire” which meant ‘to be ignorant of’. From “nescire” the word changed to “nescius” meaning ‘ignorant’, and then changed “nice”, which at
Locke, The New Negro, and the textual translation of the play, Madame Butterfly, into “M.
I have often been asked why I would translate this poem because apparently, a text cannot be important if someone has not translated it before. Because of this, completing this translation could seem like a silly task if one fails to see the importance of this poem both in its time as well as the information it can provide us today. Mexía and Clarinda add a work to “New World Literature” that presents medieval knowledge in a unique way that arguably effects later works (Vélez-Sainz 55). Clarinda’s poem presents this knowledge in a way that gives women and the South a place in poetry and knowledge. In a way, Mexía and Clarinda “translated” this medieval knowledge to push forward their own understanding of the concepts as well as introduce their own ideas about the concepts and their importance in their
"For the translator, who stands astride two cultures, possesses two different sensibilities, and assumes a double identity" —Husain Haddawy
André Lefevere (1992) proposes that translation is a rewriting of the source text, in which the relationship among various shareholders certainly influence the production of the target text. This is especially prominent in translating Lolita, which allows multiple interpretations; for instance, whether the tie between Lolita and Humbert Humbert is passionate love or destructive
According to Hermans, the understanding that translations can never be produced in a blankness, without taking into account the time and culture, and the will to clarify the time and culture bound criteria which are at play, gives rise to the shift in early eighties towards a evocative
In the 1960s and 1970s, based on the concept of equivalence, many scholars have developed various views and approaches, which has improved and further developed the translation theory. Nida (as cited in Venuti, 2000), one of the most influential linguists in the translation field, defines two different types of equivalence, which are formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses on the form and content of the source text. Dynamic equivalence emphasizes that the translation need to use an unmarked expression, but to provide the same function in the target text. The target text 1 shown in table 1 is an example of using formal equivalence. The Chinese sign ‘注意安全’ has been translated as ‘Attention Safety’. However, due to the differences of the terms between Chinese and English, this target text could be difficult to understand by the target audience. Hence, as Nida (as cited in Venuti, 2000) states by using formal equivalence, it is necessary to use footnotes to help target audience understand these idiomatic terms in the source language. The target text two: ‘Caution!’ is an example of using dynamic equivalence. This translation only translated the first two Chinese characters. The language use of this translation has been made some adjustment to match the context of the target language. However, this translation could provide the same function in the target culture as the function of the source text in the source culture. Thus, Nida’s (as cited in Venuti, 2000) two types of equivalence approach provide some effective methods of translation. After using footnotes or some essential adjustment, the source test could be generally considered as
The procedure we are going to examine here is the equivalence in translation at word level, or, as we will see, the lack of equivalence. This procedure is possible when the translator in able find a SL textual item replacement in the TL, the closest possible to the original meaning and style. Many people could think that this is an easy task and that many languages can be translated by using this particular method; we will see how complicated it can be.
The field of Computational Linguistics is relatively new; however, it contains several sub-areas reflecting practical applications in the field. Machine (or Automatic) Translation (MT) is one of the main components of Computational Linguistics (CL). It can be considered as an independent subject because people who work in this domain are not necessarily experts in the other domains of CL. However, what connects them is the fact that all of these subjects use computers as a tool to deal with human language. Therefore, some people call it Natural Language Processing (NLP). This paper tries to highlight MT as an essential sub-area of CL. The types and approaches of MT will be considered, and limitations discussed.
In fact, Arabic translator may face difficulties in translating the Holy Quran to the English language. The main problem that faces Muslim translators in translation Holy Quran is no equivalent of Islamic terms that lead them to use Communicative translation, For example, Zakah which means (alms giving - زكاة) and Taqwa (piety - تقوى) So the way of translating these terms into English language only gives the close meaning (Ali et al, 2012, p. 588). Additionally, translation of holy texts is difficult because sometimes the translators interpret superficially and biased of choosing the right equivalents (Khosravi, Pourmohammadi, 2016, p. 152). Hence, Amjed (2013, p.141) suggested that it is not enough to only read one translation of the Holy Quran if Arabic is not the first language, the greater the number of translation read the easier to find the essence of the original text. It could be difficult task to translate Islamic expression since it may have non- equivalent words in the English
The Importance of the Brief for a Translator under the Framework of the Skopos Theory