JAMUR UPDATE

PAPERS

PRINCIPLE OF TRANSLATION

Arrenged by:

Name : Ujang MuranaWijaya

Class : 3A

SEKOLAH TINGGGI KEGURUAN DAN ILMU PENDIDKAN (STKIP)

PASUNDAN CIMAHI

2012

UNIT I

DEFINITION OF TRANSLATION

Tranlataion is basically a change of form language we are refering to the actual words phrase, clause, sentence, phargraps etc. Which are spoken or writen . tranlation then consist of studing the lexicon gggramatical structure comunication situation and cultural contexof source language text analizing inthe order determine it’s meaning anf than recontruction this same meaning using the lwxion and gramatical structure which are apporiate unyhr receptor language and it’s cultural contexts

Translation is studying the lexicon, grammatical structure, communication situation, and cultural context of the source language text, analyzing it in order to determine its meaning, and then reconstructing this same meaning using lexicon and grammatical structure which are appropriate in the receptor language and its cultural context. (Larson, 1984: 3

Another expert, Wilss (1982: 3), states that translation is a transfer process which aims at the transformation of a written source language text (SLT) into an optimally equivalent target language text (TLT), and which requires the syntactic, the semantic, and the pragmatic understanding and analytical processing of the source text. Syntactic understanding is related to style and meaning. Understanding of semantics is meaning related activity. Finally, pragmatic understanding is related to the message or implication of a sentence. This definition does not states what is transferred. Rather, it states the requirement of the process.

According to Brislin (1976: 1) translation is a general term referring to the transfer of thoughts and ideas from one language to another, whether the language is in written or oral form, whether the languages have established orthographies or not; or whether one or both languages is based on signs, as with signs of the deaf.

.Translation is the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual material in another language (TL). (Catford, 1965)

Translation is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text. (Newmark, 1988: 5)

Nida and Taber (1982: 12) see translating as a process of reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. In other words, translation is a transfer of meaning, message, and style from one SLT to the TLT. In the order of priority, style is put the last. Here the things to reproduce (transfer) is stated, message.

Newmark (1991: 27) defines the act of translating very briefly. It is the act of transferring meaning of a stretch or a unit of language, the whole or a part, from one language to another. (The discussion on meaning can be seen at sub-point F. Meaning, Message, and Style.)

According to the purpose, translation can be divided into four types: (a) pragmatic, (b) aesthetic-poetic, (c) ethnographic, and (d) linguistic translation (Brislin, 1976: 3-4). Pragmatic translation is the translation of a message with an interest in accuracy of the information meant to be communicated in the target language form. Belonging to such translation is the translation of technical information, such as repairing instructions. The second type is aesthetic-poetic translation that does not only focus on the information, but also the emotion, feeling, beauty involved in the original writing. The third is ethnographic translation that explicates the cultural context of the source and second language versions. The last type is linguistic translation, the one that is concerned with equivalent meanings of the constituent morphemes of the second language and with grammatical form. Seen from this classification, the translation of literary work should be the aesthetic-poetic one.

The other kinds of translation or translation approach important to review are the ones related to the concept of dynamic translation, semantic translation, communicative translation, and artistic translation.

Dynamic translation tries to transfer the messages or ideas into a target language and to evoke in the target language readers the responses that are substantially equivalent to those experienced by the source text readers (Nida and Taber, 1982 :28). A definition of dynamic translation centers on the concept of dynamic equivalence, that is the closest natural equivalence to the source language message. Hohulin (1982: 15) notices that the definition of dynamic translation contains three essential terms: (a) equivalent, which points toward the source language message, (b) natural, which points toward the receptor language, and (3) closest, which binds the two orientations together on the basis of the highest degree of approximation. Dynamic equivalence approach can be used in the level of translating sentences or group of sentences, because the whole message lies here.

Similar to the above concept is the idiomatic translation developed by Beekman and Callow (in Gutt, 1991: 68). It resembles the dynamic equivalence approach in the sense that it rejects the form-oriented translation and emphasizes that a translation should convey the meaning of the original. A translation, according to this approach, should be faithful to the ‘dynamics’ of the original, or the SL’s ‘naturalness’ of language use and ease of comprehension.

In the area of literary translation, Chukovsky (1984) offers the concept of artistic translation. Like the other types of translation, meaning is a very important point to consider. Yet, style is taken as importantly as the other aspects for style is the portrait of the author; so when a translator distorts his style he also distorts ‘his face’ (Chukovsky, 1984: 20). Besides the meaning, impression on the readers should also be kept the same. This translation expert states that it is essential that the readers of the translation should be carried into the very same sphere as the readers of the original, and the translation must act in the very same nerves (Chukovsky, 1984: 80).

To compare, formal and dynamic translation center on the message of the original, the semantic and communicative translation on whether author-centered or reader-centered, and artistic translation does on the consideration of literary aspects: ideas and style. The concepts are based on different ground. It is clear that the concept of dynamic translation is suitable for translating the Bible. It is so because the concept of dynamic equivalence itself was developed from the practice of Bible translation. As it is known, there are many kinds of text some of which are with the characteristics different from the Bible. The semantic and communicative ones, on the other hand, can be applied at any kinds of text. The case of style is also discussed by Newmark in his hint that “the more important the language of the text or units of text, the more closely it should be translated.” Finally, artistic translation is probably most appropriate for translating certain literary works, like poetry. Maintaining the author’ style accurately is very difficult in certain novels as the translator is confronted with the syntactic system as well as literary convention of the target language.

The term "translation" can be generally defined as the action of interpretation of the meaning of a text, and production of an equivalent text that communicates the same message in another language. In geometry and physics, translation is the relocation of the position of points or objects.

UNIT II

THE PROCESS OF TRANSLATION

At one point we have a writer in a room, struggling to approximate the impossible vision that hovers over his head. He finishes it, with misgivings. Some time later we have a translator struggling to approximate the vision, not to mention the particulars of language and voice, of the text that lies before him. He does the best he can, but is never satisfied. And then, finally, we have the reader. The reader is the least tortured of this trio, but the reader too may very well feel that he is missing something in the book, that through sheer ineptitude he is failing to be a proper vessel for the book’s overarching vision."
(Michael Cunningham, "Found in Translation." The New York Times, Oct. 2, 2010)

1. an act, process, or instance of translating: as a : a rendering from one language into another; also : the product of such a rendering b : a change to a different substance, form, or appearance : conversion c (1) : a transformation of coordinates in which the new axes are parallel to the old ones (2) : uniform motion of a body in a straight line

2. the process of forming a protein molecule at a ribosomal site of protein synthesis from information contained in messenger RNA — compare transcription 3

Translation is a process that involves the transfer of a message from one language to another. This process includes a set of activities based on other disciplines related to language, writing, culture and linguistics.

Text linguistics is concerned with the way how parts of text are organized and related one to another to form a comprehensive meaning so it is useful to analyze the translation process and the meaning transfer from a source language to a target language.

As translation process is a multi-disciplinary process, it suggests three major activities run simultaneously:

Transfer of information from the source language to the target language.
Synch-analysis of text for the translation and research of subject-matter.
Continuous self-development and learning.

            During the translation process, translators establish equivalences between a source text and a target language that is why this process can be expressed as interpreting the meaning of the source text and re-encoding this meaning in the target language.
            First, to extract the meaning of a text the translator must recognize the section of text that will be processed as a cognitive unit that means "Translation units" which can be a word, a phrase or even one or more sentences. Although it can be seen as a simple procedure, it is a complex cognitive operation for that reason translators need in-depth knowledge to re-extract the meaning in the objective language.
            Actually, many sources maintain that the translator's knowledge of the objective language is more important, and requires being deeper, than its knowledge of the source language. For this reason, many translators translate into a language of which they are native speakers so this process needs good knowledge about the grammar, syntax, idioms and semantics of the origin language.

2.1 Factors influencing the quality of translation

Translating is probably the most complex process so its quality depends on a number of factors, which are crucial to the process and these factors must be systematically considered. There are key factors in the three most important areas: linguistic, culture and personal conditions.

Linguistic factors
Linguistic factors exert a direct and crucial influence so each of the linguistic factors such as phonological, lexical, syntactic and textual, can interfere with translation because interlingua differences is a main source of translation difficulties.
Cultural factors
Translation works as a cultural bridge between two worlds and makes communication possible between different linguistic communities due to two languages are not similar to be considered as the same social reality so translation will always be influenced by two cultures.
Personal factors
Professional and psychological conditions of translators have a direct influence on the translated text so they must have personal competences and personal attitudes.

THE APPROACHES TO ANALYZING

(how do we start translating)

(Newmark, 1988: 21)

You start translating sentence by sentence, for say the first paragraph or chapter, to get the feel and the tone of the text, and then you deliberately sit back, review the position, and read the rest of the SL text. (when you trust your intuition)You read the whole text two or three times, and find the intention, register, tone, mark the difficult words and passages and start translating only when you have taken your bearings. (when you trust your power of analysis)

TIME MANAGEMENT

UNIT III

KINDS OF TRANSLATIN

3.1 Kinds of translation

Generally translators have a free choice for translation, namely ‘direct/literal translation’ Borrowing, calque and literal) and ‘oblique/indirect translation’ It is important to note as pointed out by Nabokov in his essay on “Problems of Translation: ‘Onegin’ in English” edited by Venuti2 that: “the term free translation’ smacks of knavery and tyranny. It is when the translator sets out to render the ‘spirit’ – not the textual sense – that he begins to traduce his author”. The clause ‘smacks of knavery and tyranny’ denotes that ‘free translation’ is not appreciable and reliable so it is to be avoided to maintain the axiom of fidelity and faithfulness to the original text. Nabokov regards it as a flavor of dishonesty, trickery and injustice where a translator paraphrases it with his personal opinion.. First direct/literal procedures of translation that include – borrowing,calque and literal, are given as follows. (The point to note is that in the procedure of direct (literal) translation, all of its subcategories, may or may not be amalgamated in the process of translation.)

3.2 Direct translation

(a) Borrowing

Borrowing is the simplest and void of style method of translating to overcome some metalinguistic problems. Borrowing is sought as a resort when equivalent in TL seems difficult or inappropriate for better translation. For example, if a translator is to translatethe word ‘basant’ into English which definitely has no one word or exact equivalent in English, as a resort and inevitably, he has to borrow the word ‘basant’ for communication of its cultural and conventional meaning.. Examples of borrowing from the Qur’ān may include the Arabic lexical items/terms like ‘Subhaan’ (36:36) and ‘Aya’ (36:37). The word ‘Subhaan’ has no equivalent in English. Similarly the term ‘Aya’ also hasnoone word substitution. The phrases/clauses ‘Glory be to Him’,Glory (proclaim/flawlessness)of Who (He)’, ‘Glory to Allah’,limitless in His glory is He’, ‘Holy is He Who’, substitute forthe word ‘Subhaan’ but there is no one word equivalent denoting all of its shades of meaning. There is also a problem of connotative meaning of such words, e.g., in Bible the word ‘glory’ means worship, adoration and thanksgiving (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary). Then the term ‘Aya’ has been translated by different translators as ‘sign’, or ‘token’. Both words having worldly attributes spoil the divinity of the Message and do not give specifically intended meaning of Monotheism in their contexts.Translators’ interest in borrowing is developing in response to the difficulties that crop up during the process of translation.

(b) Calque

Calque’s status in translation is that of a sandwich between pure borrowing and TL/receptor’s expectations. A calque is a peculiar kind of borrowing whereby a language borrows an expression form of another but then translates literally each of its elements, e.g., ‘Qur’ān-i-Hakeem’ and in English it becomes ‘wise Qur’ān’. There are many fixed calques like borrowing, which, after a period of time, become an integral part of the TL. Translators seem interested in calques that may minimize linguistic difficulties like the terms and imagery of the Qur’ān without using actual borrowing that may cause comprehension problems

for receptors. It serves dual purpose – first, it does not use an actual borrowed word exactly as it is used in SL; second, its use as a calque makes meaning more clear in the TL and to some extent receptor’s expectations are fulfilled.

(c) Literal translation

Literal or word-for-word translation is the direct transfer of explicit features of SL text into TL text. Venuti3 states: “The term literal translation” tautological since anything but that is nottruly a translation but an imitation, an adaptation or a parody”. Here the translator’s task is adhering to the surface linguistic needs of the SL and TL. Literal translation is not appreciable both 49 for SL and TL. First, the niceties of SL and context of the message is not given due consideration; second, for a common reader it looks like a random collection of lexical items, hence makes no sense towards comprehension of a message whereas translation is meant for receptors so their difficulties of comprehension need to be emphasized. Anyhow, Jean-Paul4 and others are of the view that: “a literal translation is a unique solution which is reversible and complete in itself”. The opinion about literal translation contained in the phrases

‘unique solution’ and ‘complete in itself’ seems an overestimation. How a word-for-word translation may be regarded as ‘unique’ and ‘complete’. Here two questions arise to evaluate

Paul’s idea: (i) does literal translation of the Qur’ān encompass all dimensions of its Message? The answer is certainly ‘no’, (ii) does the literal translation cause comprehension problems for receptor of the Message? The answer is definitely ‘yes’. Nida5 is a bit different in defining the term ‘literal translation’. He says: “literal translation is one that translates only the strictly

explicit features”. The phrase ‘explicit features’ is self-evident that literal translation has no priorities/regard for deep structure,

3.3 Cribs (exact or interlinear translation)

Cribs or interlinear is better for students who want to follow the original text word-for-word with the translation of each word printed directly under the word it renders. Dr. Zia ul Haq’s translation of the Qur’ān is a fascinating model of interlinear/cribs. This also, according to Dr. Zia, was specifically designed for students of the Qur’ān. This procedure of translating proves an appropriate lexicon but it is definitely problematic for comprehension of the Qur’ānic message by common readers in TL. It may also happen that because of structural and metalinguistic differences certain stylistic effects may not be achieved without upsetting the syntactic and or lexis order. After trying the aforesaid kinds of translations, if the translator regards a literal translation unacceptable, he may approach the methods of oblique/indirect translation procedures9 which include – transposition, modulation, equivalence and adaptation.

3.4 Oblique translation

(a) Transposition

Transposition involves replacing one word class (SL) with another (TL) but without changing the meaning of the message. From a stylistic point of view, the source and the tansposed expression do not necessarily have the same degree of communication. The translator should preferably choose to transpose the SL text if this translation fits better into the text, or allows a particular stylistic nuance to be retained. The transposed form is more literary in character and frequently used case of transposition is that of interchange. This procedure focuses simply on replacement and communicative dimensions are regarded as something secondary.

(b) Modulation

Modulation is a variation of the form of the message, obtained by a change in the point of view (it is totally unacceptable in case of translations of revealed messages). This procedure is considered unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL. The clause ‘obtained by a change in the point of view’ indicates that this procedure involves subjectivity which certainly lacks reliability in communication of the message hence quite unacceptable both for SL and TL readers.

(c) Equivalence

‘ouch!’10 Many equivalents are fixed and belong to the repertoire of idioms, clichés, and proverbs. Generally proverbs are perfect example of equivalences. The method of creating equivalences is frequently applied to idioms too but in case of the Qur’ānic translation perfect equivalence of the Qur’ānic imagery is a fundamental problem. Though some English phrases and idioms give a closer equivalence yet communication of the intensity of the Qur’ānic Message through these substitutions is virtually impossible. However, in commercial translations such equivalences may serve the purpose.

(d) Adaptation

This procedure is used where the situation being referred to by the SL message is unknown in the TL culture and as a resort, in such cases translators have to adapt and create a new equivalent situation just to run the job. So adaptation can be regarded as a situational equivalence. Refusal to inevitable adaptation affects not only the syntactic structure but also hinders the development of ideas in the text. All of the procedures of translating given above may be applied more or less at the three levels of expression, i.e., lexis, syntactic structure and message.

3.5Principles of translation

Everything in the world is governed by certain rules and principles and translation is no exception. Each area of translation has its own scope and limitations. A translator requires to illustrate the most common basic principles, problems, challenges and strategies before translating important and sensitive texts and particularly revealed Message. If a translator is unfamiliar with basic principles of translating, injustice, both with SL text and its rendering in TL is certain. Translation is not merely substitution and replacement of linguistic items, instead it is a complex and challenging job. Nida11 is of the view that: “translating is basically not a process of matching surface forms by rules of correspondence, but rather a more complex procedure of analysis, transferring and restructuring”. The phrase ‘complex procedure’ demands some principles as a procedure is based upon certain principles, e.g., principles of analysis, principles of transferring and principles of restructuring.

3.5.1 General translation12

(1) Meaning

Reading and comprehending isolated lexical items may be highly misleading. Yallop1 says that: “Words do not mean what we want them to mean but are governed by social convention… we normally use and respond to meanings in context”. The phrase/clause ‘social convention’ and ‘meaning in context’ show that words are given meaning by social

convention14 as the same word may mean something else in a different social convention. Similarly words in isolation have different referential and connotative meanings but when they are used in some context, they give contextual meaning. The translation should give accurate meaning of the SL message in its context. Nothing should be added or removed arbitrarily through paraphrasing. The translator is to ensure:

a) Is the meaning of the original text clear? If not what and where is something wrong?

b) Are any words ‘loaded’ that need some explanation of the underlying implications?

c) Is dictionary meaning of a particular word suitable one?

(2) Form

Form is style and style is form. The ordering of words and ideas in a translation should match the original as closely as possible. But for better communication/comprehension, differences in language structure often require changes in the form and order of words. In the Qur’ānic translation, the idiom of Arabic is changed into the idiom of English/TL with regard to receptor’s expectations.

(3) Register

Languages like Arabic and English often differ greatly in their levels of formality in a given context (e.g., Arabic and the Qur’ān). To resolve these differences, a translator must distinguish between formal/informal, fixed expression or personal expressions, so the translator is to consider:

(a) Does literal translation of any expression sound too formal or informal?

(b) Does the intention of the writer come through in the

translation or the message is distorted?

(4) Source language influence

Whatever the translation style is, it seems influenced by SL. The most common criticism of translation is that it does not sound natural in TL. This is because the translator’s thought and choice of words are shaped by the original text. For example, literal translation of the Qur’ān in English where idiom of English is not maintained, is the outcome of SL (Arabic) influence. This style is not appreciated by common English reader particularly unfamiliar with the Qur’ānic style. A balanced approach is needed remaining faithful to the original text and realizing communication and receptor’s difficulties of comprehension.

(5) Style and clarity

A style of translation is to be determined to:

(a) have clarity of the intended message,

(b) maintain fidelity to the original text,

(6) Idiom

Imagery and idiomatic expressions are generally untranslatable in their true sense. These may include similes, metaphors, proverbs and sayings, colloquialism and in English phrasal verbs. If the expression cannot be directly translated, any one of the following may be tried for better communication and comprehension:

(a) retain the original word, in inverted commas, e.g.,‘saddan’ (36:9),

(b) retain the original expression with a literal explanation in

(d) use a non-idiomatic or plain prose translation, e.g., ‘a barrier is erected in front of stubborn non-believers’. A golden principle is that an inappropriate idiom carrying inappropriate meaning must not be forced into the translation.

(7) Three essential stages of translation

a) Forming thoughts in SL.

b) Finding some suitable expression (with regard to context/register, SL).

c) Recreating the text in another language (TL).

Here an important point to note is that a translator is not supposed to spot the original text only, but to explore and distinguish the differences between the three versions, (e.g., Arabic, Urdu and English in a Pakistani situation). This also supports the idea that errors may creep into translation from translation. So translation direct from the original text (SL) is more reliable.

(8) Other rules of translating

a. An idiomatic expression should not be translated literally if it makes no sense in one’s own language (TL). For example: the Arabic expression “kun fayakoon” (36:82) cannot be exactly rendered into English, though it has been translated as “Be! and it is”. This is the translation of its surface features. Nida17 comments that: “Literal translation is one that translates only the strictly explicit features”.

b. If the image is powerful, or strikingly concise such as “al balaagh ul mubeen” (36:17), retain the original words with an approximation in brackets, e.g., (openness), even approximation must be well thought.

c. Idiomatic expressions cannot be defined in their true sense, however any attempt of their definition may render the expression as unidiomatic.

d. What words mean in one language, cannot often be exactly conveyed in another (TL). The approach of translating should be natural and not unjust. It is better to translate the meaning of the message rather than the words.

e. There is no finality in interpretation as interpretations may be as many as readers/interpreters are. No one can be forced to interpret this or that way. An axiom is that you can bring a horse to the tub of water but you cannot force the horse to drink water which means one may guide people what they need or what and how they should do, but one cannot make them do it.

3.5.2 Bible translation18

Some principles have partially been recognized and formulated by those engaged practically in translating the Bible literature and other similar research in the field. Nida claims that variety of problems cropped up while translating Bible. In the light of practical problems in Bible translating, he determined that the results of any accurate translating reveal a few basic principles of translation as given below. But an important point to note is that Nida’s principles of translations are the outcome of a vast experience of Bible translating in different major languages of the world and not only English.

a. Language consists of a systematically organized set of oral-aural

Symbol

The process of revealed messages results in oral and aural symbols simultaneously that is to say the uttered symbols (by the first agency/source) are also listened and interpreted by a listener (second agency/receptor). The written symbolic system of any language imperfectly reflects the ‘spoken/heard’ form of language. It means that miracles of the originally revealed Message like the Qur’ān, cannot be communicated through translations.

b. Association between symbols and referents are essentially arbitrary

Symbols/signs and referents are purely arbitrary and may vary from language to language and culture to culture. For example, the same lexical item may carry different meaning in different cultures. So a translator is to focus on cultural meaning too. This is a complex and challenging task which needs worldwide research on different languages, their dimensions and social/cultural conventions at micro-level.

c. The segmentation of experience by speech symbol is arbitrary (in

different social conventions)

Segmentation of different speech symbols like colour, kinship and body parts may vary according to their experience in peculiar social conventions, hence translation of such items needs utmost care otherwise misinterpretation is certain. For example, there are only three ‘colour words’ corresponding to white, black and red which however, divide up the entire spectrum, in many African languages. A comparison of related sets of words in any field of experience, reveals arbitrary segmentation. Since no two languages experience segmentation in the same way, this means that a word-for-word (literal) translation can never be accurate and meaningful in different social conventions.

d. No two languages exhibit identical systems of organizing symbols

into meaningful expressions

A language is a system of systems. Each language exhibits its peculiar distinctive syntactic and lexical systems. The basic principle of translation is that no translation in a TL can be the exact equivalent of the model in the SL that is to say, all types of translations involve (i) loss of information, (ii) addition of information and or skewing of information. One must examine the ethno-linguistic design of communication to understand how this distortion of message takes place. There is a ‘source’ (the speaker as source and encoder), a ‘message’ as expressed in accordance with the particular structure of the language, a ‘receptor’ (decoder/receiver) and a cultural context as a whole. An important point to note is that despite the close connection between ‘message’ and ‘context’, a translator must realize the fact that every ‘source’ and every ‘receptor’ is a different individual with different background and hence may be somewhat diverse in the use and understanding of a ‘message’.

3.5.3 The Qur’ānic translation

These principles have been ascertained through the study of different Qur’ānic translations into English and the comments by different translators of the Qur’ān, e.g., linguistic difficulties of translation experienced by translators, receptor’s comprehension problems and communicative dimensions of the Message. The Qur’ānic translation done in the light of these principles will add to the reliability both of translator and the translation but at the same time this is not a final word, there are so many things at micro-level which needs to be taken into account for better translation.

a. Fidelity to SL text

How can this fidelity to SL text be maintained? This is possible only when a translator knows Arabic language and literature, its social and cultural conventions. Secondly, a translator must be free of bias and prejudice. Nothing should be more or less than the Message given in the original text. Subjectivity is to be avoided.

b. Social conventions of TL

A common feature of all languages is their peculiar social conventions. A translator is to keep abreast with the cultural and functional meanings of lexis as are used and understood in the respective communities. Otherwise a blind attempt may result in misinterpretation. This is how a single translation of the Qur’ān in English for different ethnic groups may not suffice. Here an interethnic-linguistic communicative approach is needed.

c. Receptor’s expectations

A target language reader of the Qur’ānic translations expects the idiom of his own language. Syntactic arrangement of the translated text should be unambiguous and nothing about the content of the Message be confusing. This is possible when a translator realizes receptor’slinguistic and comprehension difficulties. A translator of the Qur’ān may develop receptor’s interest in the study of the Message if the reader is not entangled in a confused situation because of confused communication.

d. The Qur’ānic imagery

A translator of the Qur’ān cannot abstain from translating the Qur’ānic imagery though he may be in a difficult translating situation. A reliable translation of the Qur’ānic figures of speech is difficult if not impossible. Exact equivalents are rare, only they may substitute the Qur’ānic imagery and even if this substitution seems difficult then put the original in parenthesis and paraphrase it but this is to be done with utmost care so that the sense of the Message is not distorted.

e. Terms of the Qur’ān

The Qur’ānic terms are untranslatable but a translator has to communicate their meaning more or less so what should he do? Ultimately he is to put the terms in original in brackets and explain their sense as accurately as possible. But a culturally loaded term may lose a lot which cannot be avoided.

f. Clarity of intended Message and its divinity

Preserving sense of the intended Message and its divinity is problematic but not impossible. Certain extra efforts are needed by a translator to make the translation unambiguous and reliable. Intended Message means there should be nothing superfluous nor something understated. Lexis used in translation are to maintain the sublimity and divinity of Divine Words and it must not put on the linguistic garb of a worldly text.

3.6 Difficulties of translation

A general view is that translation is an operation performed both on and in language. Resultantly this operation brings forth translating problems. A person with no experience of the processes of translating may not judge the linguistic and nonlinguistic problems involved in the translation except a translator. As there are different categories of translation, similarly, they have their own requirements of rendering a textwhich eventually result in certain difficulties for a translator as determined by theoristsand scholars with expertise on translation.

3.6.1General literature

1. In case of translating scientific literature the problems of style, lexical

appropriacy and such other niceties do not come in the way.

2. SL conventions is another problem. A translator has to reflect on SL

culture while translating into TL.

3. Translations of SL literary compositions is rendering of one creative work into another language (TL) which is certainly a complex phenomenon.

4. A translation cannot replace the original text because of its certain weaknesses. No translation can convey the sense and intended meaning of the SL text. Translation, therefore, has the inherent weakness of imperfection.

3.6.2 Bible

Here are some principal problems of translation, experienced by translators through translating Old Testament and New Testament from Hebrew (SL) into Greek and English (TLs), as stated by Nida. They have useful information about the difficulties of translating revealed Messages like the Holy Qur’ān.

1. ‘Secondary agency’, i.e., a first agent causing another to perform some action, e.g.,‘God spoke through the angel and prophets’. Hence the original Message is fromAllah through secondary sources, i.e., the angel Gibrail and the prophets. Sometimes a translator gets confused as towho said what, when and where.

2. Translating direct quotations, particularly when the personal reference is

obscured by stylistic shifts from first to third person.

3. Rhetorical questions in revealed Message prove problematic for atranslator.

4. Lack of cultural correspondences between SL and TL.

5. Incommensurate logotactic patterns, that is to say, words cannot be used in Lengua in the same kinds of combinations as the corresponding lexical units occur in Greek”

6. A translation axiom is that idiom has exocentric22 expression hence. untranslatable. As idioms have their ‘grounding’ in the cultural behaviour, i.e., practices or beliefs, whether contemporary or historical so the result is an imperfect translation of idiomatic expression.

7. Perfect communication is impossible and all communication is one of varying degrees so the Message loses its intensity.

8. The equivalents in translation cannot be absolute instead may communicate some tinge of actual meaning.

9. The translator is not faced with the problem of right or wrong but with ‘how right’ and ‘how wrong’. This needs a thorough analysis of SL and TL before transferring and restructuring.

10. Living languages change and words have no exception. It is difficult for a translator to have the latest status of certain lexical items.

11. A common problem of translation is that firstly, no word ever has exactly the same meaning in two different expressions; secondly, there are no complete synonyms within a language; thirdly, there are no exact correspondences between related words in different languages. Ananalogy for the family of languages may help in understanding the varying colours/shades of meaning in different cultures. This seems similar to the differences in physical/facial features, habits, likes/dislikes, aptitudes, voices of members of a family. As different members of a family cannot exactly be the same so is the case of lexis of a languagefamily.

12. Finding out ‘the specific linguistic context’ and the ‘practical world’ (non-linguistic) context is another problem for a translator.

13. Variations of situations in the source and receptor’s language cause the problem of equivalence.

14. Syntactic adjustment may result in frequent mistakes on the part of a translator.

15. Selection of different words which have related meaning for a term is also common difficulty of translating.

16. A translator is to regard three dimensions of ‘restructuring’: (i) stylistic level, (ii) literary genre, (iii) functional/dynamic dimension. Here the translator is to adopt a style which may maintain fidelity to the original text and meet expectations of receptor. Secondly, the status of genre, e.g., a revealed Message is to be regarded faithfully. Thirdly, functional dimension, i.e., what will be the function/effect of the Message.

3.6.3 The Holy Qur’ān

The Holy Qur’ān is a revealed Message and its rendering is much more difficult. Other worldly literature composed in mundane languages is easier for translation. In addition to the requirements of translation of any literary or poetic composition, the translator of the Qur’ān needs to have a grasp of the basic Message of the Qur’ān with firm belief in its content and the messenger (the Prophet Muhammad (SAW)).

1. Translation of untranslatable Qur’ānic terms and their representative words may cause further confusion in comprehension of the Qur’ānic Message. The artistic beauty and grandeur of the original text is spoiled through translation.

2. Brevity ‘short verses’ containing vast elaborations, as one of the Qur’ānic stylistic devices, poses the greatest difficulty for the translator.

3. Rendering the meaning of the Qur’ān in a foreign (TL) would mean missing out more important dimensions of the original text/context of the Qur’ān. No mundane language can possibly be adequate for conveying highest spiritual thought of the Qur’ān.

4. There cannot be a single word in any language that may convey the exact meaning of the Qur’ānic term. Dr. Ahmed24 comments that: “The Qur’ānic term is full ray of light. When a translator looks at it through the prism of an imperfect equivalent,… he misses a great deal of its meaning by confining his attention to one particular tinge”. However, a group of word can give some idea of a term. In other words explanatory notes are required to explain the real meaning of the term.

3.7 Cribs (exact or interlinear translation)8

Cribs or interlinear is better for students who want to follow the original text word-for-word with the translation of each word printed directlyunder the word it renders. Dr. Zia ul Haq’s translation of the Qur’ān is afascinating model of interlinear/cribs. This also, according to Dr. Zia,was specifically designed for students of the Qur’ān. This procedure oftranslating proves an appropriate lexicon but it is definitely problematic for comprehension of the Qur’ānic message by common readers in TL. It may also happen that because of structural and metalinguistic differences certain stylistic effects may not be achieved without upsetting the syntactic and or lexis order. After trying the aforesaid kinds of translations, if the translator regards a literal translation unacceptable, he may approach the methods of oblique/indirect translation procedures9 which include – transposition, modulation, equivalence and adaptation.

3.8 Transposition

Transposition involves replacing one word class (SL) with another (TL) but without changing the meaning of the message. From a stylistic point of view, the source and the tansposedexpression do not necessarily have the same degree of communication. The translator should preferably choose to transpose the SL text if this translation fits better into the text, or allows a particular stylistic nuance to be retained. The transposed form is more literary in character and frequently used case of transposition is that of interchange. This procedure focuses simply on replacement and communicative dimensions areregarded as something secondary.

2. Modulation

Modulation is a variation of the form of the message, obtained by a change in the point of view (it is totally unacceptable in case of translations of revealed messages). This procedure is considered unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL. The clausen obtained by a change in the point of view’ indicates that this procedure involves subjectivity which certainly lacks reliability in communication of the message hence quite unacceptable both for SL and TL readers.

3. Equivalence

In this procedure a translator replaces SL text through equivalents in TL text. A common experience is that one and the samesituation can be rendered by two or more different stylistic andstructural methods. A classical example of equivalence is thereaction of an amateur who accidentally hits his finger with ahammer: “if he were French his cry of pain would be transcribedas ‘Aie!’, and if he were English, this would be interpreted as‘ouch! Many equivalents are fixed and belong to the repertoire of idioms, clichés, and proverbs. Generally proverbs are perfect example of equivalences. The method of creating equivalences is frequently applied to idioms too but in case of the Qur’ānic translation perfect equivalence of the Qur’ānic imagery is a fundamental problem. Though some English phrases and idioms

give a closer equivalence yet communication of the intensity of the Qur’ānic Message through these substitutions is virtually impossible. However, in commercial translations such

equivalences may serve the purpose.

5. Adaptation

above may be applied more or less at the three levels of expression, i.e., lexis, syntactic structure and message.

3.9 Principles of translation

3.9.1 General translation12

(1) Meaning

Reading and comprehending isolated lexical items may be highly misleading. Yallop13 says that: “Words do not mean what we want them to mean but are governed by social convention… we normally use and respond to meanings in context”. The phrase/clause ‘social convention’ and ‘meaning in context’ show that words are given meaning by social convention14 as the same word may mean something else in a different social convention. Similarly words in isolation have different referential and connotative meanings but when they are used in some context, they give contextual meaning. The translation should give accurate meaning of the SL message in its context. Nothing should be added or removed arbitrarily through paraphrasing. The translator is to ensure:

(a) Is the meaning of the original text clear? If not what and where is something wrong?

(b) Are any words ‘loaded’ that need some explanation of the

(d) Is dictionary meaning of a particular word suitable one?

(2) Form

(3) Register

(a) Does literal translation of any expression sound too formal or informal?

(a) Does the intention of the writer come through in the translation or the message is distorted?

(4) Source language influence

(5) Style and clarity

A style of translation is to be determined to:

(a) have clarity of the intended message,

(b) maintain fidelity to the original text,

(6) Idiom

(a) retain the original word, in inverted commas, e.g., ‘saddan’ (36:9),

(b) retain the original expression with a literal explanation in brackets, e.g., ‘saddan’ (a barrier/a wall),

(c) use a non-idiomatic or plain prose translation, e.g., ‘a barrier is erected in front of stubborn non-believers’. A golden principle is that an inappropriate idiom carrying inappropriate meaning must not be forced into thetranslation.

(7) Three essential stages of translation15

(a) Forming thoughts in SL.

(b) Finding some suitable expression (with regard to context/register,SL).

(a) Recreating the text in another language (TL).

Nida also suggests three important and similar steps in translating, i.e.

1. analysis of SL text and TL,

2. restructuring the text into TL.

(8) Other rules of translating

b. If the image is powerful, or strikingly concise such as “al balaaghul mubeen” (36:17), retain the original words with an approximation in brackets, e.g., (openness), even approximation must be well thought.

c. Idiomatic expressions cannot be defined in their true sense, however any attempt of their definition may render the expression as unidiomatic.

d. What words mean in one language, cannot often be exactly

conveyed in another (TL). The approach of translating should be

natural and not unjust. It is better to translate the meaning of the

message rather than the words.

e. There is no finality in interpretation as interpretations may be as many as readers/interpreters are. No one can be forced to interpret this or that way. An axiom is that you can bring a horse to the tub of water but you cannot force the horse to drink water which means one may guide people what they need or what andhow they should do, but one cannot make them do it.

3.9.2 Bible translation18

. Some principles have partially been recognized and formulated by those engaged practically in translating the Bible literature and other similar research in the field. Nida claims that variety of problems cropped up while translating Bible. In the light of practical problems in Bible translating, he determined that the results of any accurate translating reveal a few basic principles of translation as given below. But an important point to note is that Nida’s principles of translations are the outcome of a vast experience of Bible translating in different major languages of the world and not only English

(1) Language consists of a systematically organized set of oral-aural

Symbol

(2) Association between symbols and referents are essentially arbitrary

Symbols/signs and referents are purely arbitrary and may vary from language to language and culture to culture. For example, the same lexical item may carry different meaning in different cultures. So a translator is to focus on cultural meaning too. This is a complex andchallenging task which needs worldwide research on different languages, their dimensions and social/cultural conventions at micro-level.

(3) The segmentation of experience by speech symbol is arbitrary (in

different social conventions)

(4) No two languages exhibit identical systems of organizing symbols

into meaningful expressions

3.2.3 The Qur’ānic translation

(1) Fidelity to SL text

(2) Social conventions of TL

(3) Receptor’s expectations

A target language reader of the Qur’ānic translations expects the idiom of his own language. Syntactic arrangement of the translated text should be unambiguous and nothing about the content of the Message be confusing. This is possible when a translator realizes receptor’s linguistic and comprehension difficulties. A translator of the Qur’ān may develop receptor’s interest in the study of the Message if the reader is not entangled in a confused situation because of confused communication.

(4) The Qur’ānic imagery

(5) Terms of the Qur’ān

(6) Clarity of intended Message and its divinity

BAB IV

REQUIREMENT OF TRANSLATAION

4.1 Requirement Of Tranlation

· Words meaning

· Sentence contruction

· Phrase contruction

Dead Metaphor

A metaphor which has lost its poetic meaning and not considered as figurative language any longer due to its frequent use

examples:

economic wheel – giant step - etc

Living Metaphor

Considered as figurative language and still contains poetic meaning

ex: An angry sky - You are a rose among thorns - etc.

STRATEGIES TO TRANSLATE METAPHOR

Translation of metaphor by reproducing the same image
Translation of metaphor by replacing the image in SL with a standard image in TL
Translation of metaphor or simile by sense
Translation of metaphor by metaphor or simile plus sense
Translation of metaphor by simile

1. Translation of metaphor by reproducing the same image

- laut cinta langkah raksasa

- sea of love giant step

roda perekonomian economic wheel

sinar harapan ray of hope

2.. Translation of metaphor

By replacing the image in sl with the standard image in tl

Your car has wings

Lari mobilmu seperti setan

Mobilmu kencang bagaikan terbang

3. Translation Of Metaphor Or Simile By Sense

Bagai pungguk merindukan bulan.

Dreaming the impossible thing.

Dia ular berbisa.

He’s very dangerous.

The best advice is found on the pillow.

Setelah tidur nyenyak semalaman, mungkin kita akan mendapatkan jawaban dari persoalan kita

4.2 S H I F T (Transposition & Modulation)

“Transposition is a translation procedure involving a change in the grammar from SL to TL”

(Newmark, 1988: 85). “Modulasi melibatkan pergeseran makna karena terjadi perubahan perpektif dan sudut pandang” (Machali, 2000: 69)

a. A shift from singular into plural (plural into singular)

bunga-bunga : flowers

banyak rumah : many houses

tiga mobil : three cars

sepasang celana : a pair of trousers

b. A structural change that involves word-position in phrase

1 - 2 - 3

3 - 2 – 1

- rumah - bercat merah - yang besar

big - red – house

- long - dark - hair

rambut - hitam pekat - yang panjang

- splendid ancient electric train

kereta api listrik kuno yang sangat bagus

c. Phrase with adverb

1 – 2 – 3

3 – 1 - 2

highly - recommended - system

sistem - yang sangat - direkomendasikan

d. A structural change that involves word-position in sentence

Isu tentang HAM sudah kami bahas semenjak lima tahun yang lalu.

We have been discussing the issue of human rights since five years ago

Buku ini harus kamu baca

You must read the book

e. a change in part of speech

noun + noun noun + noun adverb + verb

verb + noun adj + noun verb + adj

mesin pembunuh

killing machine

bahan kimia chemical material

partai politik political party

f. from explicit into implicit (implicit into explicit)

Pria yang berdiri di sana itu adalah paman saya

The man (who is) standing there is my uncle.

Implicit

The man standing there is my uncle

Wednesday 18 January 2012

PAPERS

PRINCIPLE OF TRANSLATION

UNIT I

DEFINITION OF TRANSLATION

0 comments:

Popular Posts

About Us