Suggested Topics for Discussion
1. What is translation equivalence? Is every translation equally close semantically to its ST? How can different types of equivalence be singled out? In what way does one type of equivalence differ from the other?
2. What is the minimum semantic similarity between ST and TT? How can the first type of translation equivalence be defined? What is the purport of communication? Should the purport of communication be always preserved in translation?
3. How can the second type of equivalence be characterized? In what way does it differ from the first type? How can a situation be described in the text? Do the methods used to describe the situation in ST and TT remain the same in the second type of equivalence? What is situational equivalence?
4. What parts of the ST contents are retained in the third type of equivalence? How can the identity of the methods of describing the situation be demonstrated in such cases? What semantic variations can be observed in translations of this type?
5. What is the role of the meaning of the language units which make up the text? What is the fourth type of equivalence? In what way can the meaning of the ST syntactical structures be preserved in translation?
6. How can the fifth type of equivalence be defined? What are the main components of the word semantics? Is the whole meaning of the word actualized when the word is used in the text? Can words of different languages be identical in their meaning?
7. What levels of equivalence can be distinguished in translation? How do the equivalence levels mirror the essential features of speech units?
8. What level of equivalence can the translator reach in the translating process? Is it always necessary or possible to translate at the same level of equivalence? What factors does the choice depend on?
Text
CONSERVATION AND POLITICIANS
(1) Conservation and ecology are suddenly fashionable. (2) Politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are seizing on 'the environment' as a topical political ussue. (3) It seems, however, that they are in danger of missing the point. (4) Protecting our environment cannot be achieved simply by some magic new technology; nor by tinkering with our present system. (5) Saving the environment raises profound questions about some of fundamental assumptions of any society. (6) It is doubtful whether some of the politicians now climbing on the conservation bandwagon fully realise this point, or whether they would be so enthusiastic if they did. (7) Serious environmental conservation means that governments will have to set pollution standards, despite cries from the offending industries that their foreign competitors will benefit. (8) Politicians will have to face up to some extremely awkward decisions: for instance, whether to ban cars without anti-pollution devices. (9) There will have to be international agreements in which short-term national interests have to be sacrificed. (10) It means, in short, a more responsible view of man's relationship to his habitat.
Text Analysis
(1) What is environment? What is environmental conservation (protection)? Is there anything in common between a conservative and a conservationist? What do they want to conserve?
(2) What is a politician? Is this word positive or derogatory? What continents lie on both sides of the Atlantic? How can one "seize on the environment"? Does that phrase imply disapprobation?
(3) What is the difference between "to be in danger" and "to be in danger of doing smth."? What is "to miss the poinf'? What is "the point" in this case?
(4) Why do people think of new technology as "magic"? What does "tinker" mean? What connotation has it got in the sentence?
(5) How can the expression "to raise a question" be used? Does it mean here the same as "to call in question" or "to raise doubts"? What is an assumption? How is it used in politics? in philosophy? in everyday life?
(6) What is "to climb (or to get) on the bandwagon"? Is it a deserving or an undeserving action? What is meant here by "conservation bandwagon"?
(7) What does the modal verb "to have to" imply? What are pollution standards? Does the word "cries" here mean "shouts", "protests" or "complaints"? Why are industries referred to as "offending"?
(8) What is "to face up to smth."? Does it imply a pleasant or an unpleasant experience? What is an "awkward decision" for a politician? What is an "anti-pollution device"? Why should cars be provided with such devices? Will cars with such devices be cheaper or more expensive to make?
(9) Why are national interests referred to here as "short-term"? In what way may they be sacrificed in protecting the environment?
(10) What is "habitat"? How can the words "a responsible view of man's relationship to his habitat" be paraphrased?
Problem-Solving Exercises
A. Levels of Equivalence
I. Compare the following translations with the respective sentences in the text. State at what level of equivalence each of them is rendered into Russian.
1. Кажется, однако, что им грозит опасность упустить суть дела (3). 2. Окружающую нас среду нельзя уберечь с помощью какой-то новой техники, способной творить чудеса ... (4). 3. Охрана окружающей среды поднимает серьезные вопросы относительно основополагающих принципов любого общества (5). 4, Сомнительно, чтобы некоторые из политических деятелей, спешащих примкнуть к дви-
жению за охрану окружающей среды, полностью осознавали этот факт... (6).
II. At what level of equivalence would you translate sentence (2)? or sen-
tence (8)?
III. Which of the following translations of sentence (1) is made at a higher level of equivalence?
a) Все вдруг заговорили об экологии и охране окружающей среды.
b) Экология и охрана окружающей среды стали вдруг модными темами.
IV. Compare the following translations of sentence (7). Which of them would you prefer (if either)? Give your reasons.
a) Серьезное сохранение окружающей среды означает, что правительства должны будут установить нормы загрязнения...
b) Если серьезно заниматься охраной окружающей среды, то правительствам придется принять принудительные меры против ее загрязнения...
V. Raise the level of equivalence of the following translation of sentence
(9):
Краткосрочные национальные интересы будут принесены в жертву будущим международным соглашениям.
VI. Translate sentence (10) at the 4th level of equivalence.
VII. What arguments can you find to prove that sentence (4) should not be translated at the 5th level of equivalence?
VIII. What makes a word-for-word translation of sentence (2) impossible?
IX. What errors, if any, do you see in the following translation of sentence (8)?
Политиканам придется столкнуться лицом к лицу с крайне неудобными решениями, например, запретом на автомобили, не снабженные специальными устройствами, предотвращающими загрязнение атмосферы.
X. Translate the text. State what level of equivalence is achieved in each sentence.
B. Other Translation Problems
XI. What Russian equivalents can be suggested to translate the term "environment" in this text?
XII. Which of the following Russian word should be used as an equivalent
to the word "conservation": охрана, сохранение, защита, сбережение (окружающей среды)? Would you use one equivalent throughout TT or some variations?
XIII. How do you translate the term "conservationist"?
XIV. Which is the suitable equivalent here for "politicians": политики, политические деятели, политиканы? Why?
XV. What is the difference between the Russian substitutes for "the Atlantic": Атлантика, Атлантический океан?
XVI. Should the phrase "on both sides of the Atlantic" be rendered into Russian as по обеим сторонам Атлантики or as как в Европе, так и в Америке? Give your reasons.
XVII. What can be suggested as the Russian substitute for "topical" in sentence (2)?
ХУШ. Can the Russian ухватились за окружающую среду be used for "seizing the environment" in sentence (2) or would you prefer some other substitute? If so, why?
XIX. What would you choose for "the point" in sentence (3): суть дела, самое главное, существо проблемы or something else? And for the same word in sentence (6)?
XX. Would you prefer магическая техника (технология) for "magic technology" or техника, способная творить чудеса? Or can you think of some better Russian wording?
XXI. Suggest a Russian equivalent to the word "tinkering" in sentence (4).
XXII. Make your choice between the following Russian equivalents to the word "assumptions" in sentence (5): предположения, принципы, установки. Or can you suggest something else?
ХХП1. Can the figurative expression "to climb on the bandwagon" in sentence (6) be translated by some Russian idiom? If not, why?
XXTV. Suggest some translation variants for the following phrase: "He is very enthusiastic about your plan".
XXV. What is the accepted Russian equivalent to the term "pollution standards"? How should it be translated in sentence (7)?
XXVI. Which of the following Russian equivalents would you use to translate the words "offending industries" in sentence (7)? нарушающие отрасли промышленности; виновные отрасли
промышленности; отрасли, виновные в загрязнении среды; предприниматели, виновные в загрязнении среды
XXVII. What is the difference between the Russian трудное решение, неприятное решение, невыгодное решение? Cf. the English "awkward decisions" in sentence (8).
XXVIII. Would you translate "to face up to" in sentence (8) as столкнуться лицом к лицу с? If not, why?
XXIX. While translating sentence (9) would you use a blue-print substitute краткосрочные национальные интересы or would you prefer насущные национальные интересы, национальные интересы сегодняшнего дня or something else? Justify your preference.
XXX. Your dictionary gives two Russian translations of the word "habitat": 1. родина, место распространения (растения, животного); 2. естественная среда. Does either of them fit your translation of sentence (10)?
CHAPTER 3. TYPES OF EQUIVALENTS* Basic Assumptions
The structural similarity of ST and TT implies that relationships of equivalence are established between correlated units in the two texts. TL units in TT that are used to render the meaning of the respective SL units in ST can be said to substitute for the latter as their functional equivalents (or correspondences). Since language units are often used in their accepted meanings many SL units have regular equivalents in TL which are used in numerous TT as substitutes to those units.
Some of the SL units have permanent equivalents in TL, that is to say, there is a one-to-one correspondence between such units and their equivalents. Thus "London" is always rendered into Russian as «Лондон», "a machine-gun" as «пулемет» and "hydrogen" as «водород». As a rule this type of correspondence is found with words of specific character, such as scientific and technical terms, proper or geographical names and similar words whose meaning is more or less independent of the particular contextual situation.
Other SL units may have several equivalents each. Such one-to-many correspondence between SL and TL units is characteristic of most regular equivalents. The existence of a number of non-permanent (or variable) equivalents to a SL units implies the necessity of selecting one of them in each particular case, taking into account the way the unit is used in ST and the points of difference between the semantics of its equivalents in TL.
Depending on the type of the language units involved regular equivalents can be classified as lexical,phraseological or grammatical.
Coordinated words in two languages may correspond to each other in
See "Theory of Translation", Ch. VI. 20
one or several components of their semantic structures, while not fully identical in their semantics. The choice of the equivalent will depend on the relative importance of a particular semantic element in the act of communication. For instance, the English word "ambitious" may denote either praiseworthy or inordinate desires. Its translation will depend on which of these aspects comes to the fore. Thus "the ambitious plans of the would-be world conquerors" will be translated as «честолюбивые планы претендентов на роль завоевателей всего мира», while "the ambitious goals set by the United Nations" will give «грандиозные цели, поставленные ООН» in the Russian translation.
A variety of equivalents may also result from a more detailed description of the same object in TL. The English word "attitude", for instance, is translated as «отношение, позиция, политика» depending on the variant the Russian language prefers in a particular situation. Here the choice between equivalents is determined by TL factors.
Even if a SL unit has a regular equivalent in TL, this equivalent cannot be used in TT whenever the unit is found in ST. An equivalent is but a potential substitute, for the translator's choice is, to a large extent, dependent on the context in which the SL unit is placed in ST. There are two types of context: linguistic and situational. The linguistic context is made up by the other SL units in ST while the situational context includes the temporal, spacial and other circumstances under which ST was produced as well as all facts which the receptor is expected to know so that he could adequately interpret the message.
It is only by assessing the meanings of SL units in ST against the linguistic and situational contexts that the translator can discover what they mean in the particular case and what equivalents should be chosen as their substitutes. Thus in the following sentences the linguistic context will enable the translator to make a correct choice among the Russian equivalents to the English noun "attitude":
(1) I don't like your attitude to your work.
(2) There is no sign of any change in the attitudes of the two sides.
(3) He stood there in a threatening attitude.
It is obvious that in the first sentence it should be the Russian «отношение (к работе)», in the second sentence — «позиции (обеих сторон)», and in the third sentence - «поза (угрожающая)».
As often as not the correct substitute cannot be chosen unless the situational context is brought into play. If somebody is referred to in ST as "an abolitionist" the choice of the substitute will depend on the period described. In different historical periods abolitionists were people who sought the abolition of slavery, prohibition laws or death penalty.
Accordingly, in the Russian translation the person will be described as «аболиционист», «сторонник отмены «сухого закона», или «сторонник отмены смертной казни».
The fact that a SL unit has a number of regular equivalents does not necessarily mean that one of them will be used in each particular translation. True, in many cases the translator's skill is well demonstrated in his ability to make a good choice among such equivalents. But not infrequently the context does not allow the translator to employ any of the regular equivalents to the given SL unit. Then the translator has to look for an ad hoc way of translation which will successfully render the meaning of the unit in this particular case. Such an exceptional translation of a SL unit which suits a particular context can be described as an occasional equivalent or a contextual substitute. It is clear, for instance, that none of the above-mentioned regular equivalents to the English "attitude" can be used in the translation of the following sentence:
He has a friendly attitude towards all.
An occasional equivalent may be found through a change of the part of speech:
Он ко всем относится по-дружески.
The particular contextual situation may force the translator to give up even a permanent equivalent. Geographical names have such equivalents which are formed by imitation of the foreign name in TL. And the name of the American town of New Haven (Conn.) is invariably rendered into Russian as «Нью-Хейвен». But the sentence "I graduated from New Haven in 1915" will be hardly translated in the regular way since the Russian reader may not know that New Haven is famous for its Yale university. The translator will rather opt for the occasional equivalent: «Я окончил Йель-ский университет в 1915 году».
The regular equivalents are by no means mechanical substitutes and their use or replacement by occasional equivalents calls for a high level of the translator's skill and taste.
The same goes for phraseological equivalents. Phraseological units or idioms may also have permanent or variable equivalents. Such English idioms as "the game is not worth the candle" or "to pull chestnuts out of the fire for smb." are usually translated by the Russian idioms «игра не стоит свеч» and «таскать каштаны из огня для кого-л.», respectively. These equivalents reproduce all the aspects of the English idioms semantics and can be used in most contexts. Other permanent equivalents, though identical in their figurative meaning, are based on different images, that is, they have different literal meaning. Cf. "to get up on the wrong side of the
bed" —«встать с левой нога», "make hay while the sun shines" —«куй железо, пока горячо». Now an English idiom may have several Russian equivalents among which the translator has to make his choice in each particular case. For instance, the meaning of the English "Do in Rome as the Romans do" may be rendered in some contexts as «С волками жить - по-волчьи выть», and in other contexts as «В чужой монастырь со своим уставом не ходят». But here, again, the translator may not infrequently prefer an occasional equivalent which can be formed by a word-for-word reproduction of the original unit: «В Риме поступай так, как римляне».
The choice of grammatical units in TT largely depends on the semantics and combinability of its lexical elements. Therefore there are practically no permanent grammatical equivalents. The variable equivalents in the field of grammar may be analogous forms in TL or different forms with a similar meaning. As often as not such equivalents are interchangeable and the translator has a free choice between them. In the following English sentence "He was a guest of honour at a reception given by the Soviet government" both the Russian participle «устроенном» and the attributive* clause «который был устроен» can be substituted for the English participle "given". And the use of occasional equivalents is here more common than in the case of the lexical or phraseological units. We have seen that in the first three types of equivalence no equivalents to the grammatical units are deliberately selected in TL.
Semantic dissimilarity of analogous structures in SL and TL also result in SL structures having several equivalents in TL. For instance, attributive groups are common both in English and in Russian: "a green tree"—«зеленое дерево». But the semantic relationships between the numbers of the group are broader in English, which often precludes a blue-print translation of the group into Russian. As often as not the English attributive group is used to convey various adverbial ideas of location, purpose, cause, etc. Consider such groups as "Madrid trial" (location), "profits drive" (purpose), "war suffering" (cause). Such groups may also express various action-object relationships. Cf. labour movement" (movement by the workers), "labour raids" (raids against the workers), and "labour spies" (spies among the workers).
A word within an attributive group may sometimes alter its meaning. So, "war rehabilitation" is, in fact, rehabilitation of economy after the war, that is, "post-war rehabilitation" and "Communist trials in USA" are "trials of Communists" or "anti-Communist trials".
As a result, many attributive groups are polysemantic and are translated in a different way in different contexts. "War prosperity" may mean
"prosperity during the war" or "prosperity in the post-war period caused by the war". 'The Berlin proposals" may imply "proposals made in Berlin" (say, at an international conference), "proposals made by Berlin" (i.e. by the GDR), "proposal on Berlin" (of political, economic or other nature).*
No small number of SL units have no regular equivalents in TL. Equivalent-lacking words are often found among SL names of specific national phenomena, such as the English words "coroner, condominium, impeachment, baby-sitter" and the like. However, there are quite a number of "ordinary" words for which TL may have no equivalent lexical units: "fluid, bidder, qualifier, conservationist", etc. Some grammar forms and categories may also be equivalent-lacking. (Cf. the English gerund, article or absolute participle construction which have no counterparts in Russian.)
The absence of regular equivalents does not imply that the meaning of an equivalent-lacking SL unit cannot be rendered in translation or that its translation must be less accurate. We have seen that words with regular equivalents are not infrequently translated with the help of contextual substitutes. Similarly, the translator, coming across an equivalent-lacking word, resorts to occasional equivalents which can be created in one of the following ways:
1. Using loan-words imitating in TL the form of the SL word or word combination, e.g. tribalism — трайбализм, impeachment — импичмент, backbencher — заднескамеечник, brain-drain — утечка мозгов. As often as not such occasional formations are adopted by the members of the TL community and get the status of regular equivalents.
2. Using approximate substitutes, that is TL words with similar meaning which is extended to convey additional information (if necessary, with the help of foot-notes), e.g. drugstore — аптека, witchhunter — мракобес, afternoon — вечер. The Russian «аптека» is not exactly a drugstore where they also sell such items as magazines, soft drinks, ice-cream, etc., but in some cases this approximate equivalent can well be used.
3. Using all kinds of lexical (semantic) transformations (see Part I, Ch. 4) modifying the meaning of the SL word, e.g. "He died of exposure" may be rendered into Russian as «Он умер от простуды» or «Он погиб от солнечного удара».
4. Using an explanation to convey the meaning of the SL unit, e.g. landslide-победа на выборах подавляющим большинством голосов, brinkmanship — искусство проведения политики на грани войны, etc.
This method is sometimes used in conjunction with the first one when the introduction of a loan-word is followed by a foot-note explaining the
For a more detailed discussion of the problems involved in the translation of English attributive groups see Part II, Ch. 2 (2.1).
meaning of the equivalent-lacking word in ST. After that the translator may freely employ the newly-coined substitute.
There are also quite a number of equivalent-lacking idioms. Such English phraseological units as "You cannot eat your cake and have it", "to dine with Duke Humphrey", "to send smb. to Coventry" and many others have no regular equivalents in Russian. They are translated either by reproducing their form in TL through a word-for-word translation or by explaining the figurative meaning of the idiom, e.g.: People who live in glass should not throw stones. — Люди, живущие в стеклянных домах, не должны бросать камни; to see eye-to-eye with srnb. - придерживаться одних взглядов.*
Equivalent-lacking grammatical forms give less trouble to the translator. Here occasional substitutes can be classified under three main headings, namely:
1. Zero translations when the meaning of the grammatical unit is not rendered in the translation since it is practically identical to the meaning of some other unit and can be safely left out. In the sentence "By that time he had already left Britain" — К этому времени он уже уехал из Англии the idea of priority expressed by the Past Perfect Tense needn't be separately reproduced in TT as it is made superfluous by the presence of "by that time" and "already".
2. Approximate translations when the translator makes use of a TL form partially equivalent to the equivalent-lacking SL unit, e.g.: I saw him enter the room — Я видел, как он вошел в комнату. The Russian language has no complex objects of this type but the meaning of the object clause is a sufficient approximation.
3. Transformational translation when the translator resorts to one of the grammatical transformations (see Part I, Ch. 4), e.g.: Your presence at the meeting is not obligatory. Nor is it desirable — Ваше присутствие на собрании необязательно и даже нежелательно (the syntactical integration).
As has been emphasized, equivalents are not mechanical substitutes for SL units but they may come handy as a starting point in search of adequate translation. The translator will much profit if he knows many permanent equivalents, is good at selecting among variable equivalents and resourceful at creating occasional equivalents, taking into account all contextual factors.
Suggested Topics for Discussion
1. What is the result of the structural similarity of ST and TT? Is the
For a more detailed discussion of the problems involved in the translation of English phraseology see Part II, Ch. 2 (2.2).
notion of equivalence applicable to the correlated SL mid TL units in these texts?
2. How can regular equivalents be defined? How arc they discovered? How can they be classified? What role do they pby in the translation practice?
3. How are regular equivalents used in the translating process? What is context? What types of context influence the choice of an equivalent? What is an occasional equivalent?
4. What are equivalent-lacking words? What types of words have, as a rule, no regular equivalents? What are the principal ways of rendering the meaning of an equivalent-lacking word in translation?
5. What are equivalent-lacking grammatical forms? What role does the grammatical meaning play in the formation of text semantics? What are the principal ways of rendering the grammatical meaning in translation?
6. What is the role of SL syntactical structures in translation? How does the type of the syntactical structure in SL influence the choice of equivalents in TL? What are the main features of the meaning of the English attributive groups and how are they rendered into Russian?
7. What are the main types of set expressions? What rok do set expressions play in communication? What role do they play in the translating process?
8. What is an idiom? What are the meaningful components of an idiom? In what way can an equivalent to a SL idiom be found in TL? What factors should be considered in selecting such an equivalent?
Text
DIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES
(1) The problem I propose to discuss is rather a hard nut to crack. (2) Why does homo sapiens, whose digestive track functions in precisely the same complicated ways the world over, whose biochemical fabric and genetic potential are essentially common in all peoples and at every stage of social evolution — why does this unified mammalian species not use one common language? (3) It inhales, for its life processes, one chemical element and dies if deprived of it. (4) It makes do with the same number of teeth and vertebrae. (5) In the light of anatomical and neurophysiological universals, a unitary language solution would be readily understandable. (6) But there is also another "natural" model. (7) A deaf, non-literate observer approaching the planet from outside and reporting on crucial aspects of human appearance and behaviour, would conclude with some confidence that men speak a small number of different, though probably related, tongues. (8) He would guess at a figure of the order of half a dozen with 26
perhaps a cluster of dialects or pidgins. (9) This number would be persuasively concordant with other major parameters of human diversity. (10) Why, then, this mystery of Babel?
Text Analysis
(1) What is the meaning of the verb "to propose" when followed by an infinitive? What is the figurative meaning of the idiom "a hard nut to crack"?
(2) What is "homo sapiens"? What is the meaning of "fabric" in this context? Who is the author of the "Origin of species"? What is a mammalian? In what sense is man referred to here as "unified"?
(3) Is there any difference in meaning between "to breathe" and "to inhale"? What chemical element is meant here? What does the elliptical phrase "if deprived" stand for?
(4) What is "to make do with smth."? Is the form 'Vertebrae" plural or singular? Is there anything in common between the spine and vertebrae?
(5) What is a "universal"? How can the phrase "a unitary language solution" be paraphrased to make its sense more explicit? Does "understandable" here mean "something that can be understood" or "something that seems quite natural"?
(6) Why is the word "natural" written within inverted commas? How can the sentence be paraphrased to make the sense of "natural" in the sentence more explicit?
(7) Why should the observer be deaf and non-literate to make a wrong conclusion about the number of languages on the earth? What does "outside" mean here? What is the meaning of "crucial"? Is there any difference between "a language" and "a tongue" as used in this text?
(8) Does the phrase "of the order of imply an exact or an approximate number? What is a "pidgin"? In what way does a pidgin differ from a dialect?
(9) What is the origin of "persuasive"? Does "to be concordant" mean "to coincide" or "to correspond"? What is a "parameter"? How can the phrase "human diversity" be paraphrased?
(10) What is the Tour of Babel? What is the figurative sense of "Babel"? Why is Babel spoken of here as a kind of mystery?
Problem-Solving Exercises
A. Types of Equivalents
I. Find the words and word combinations in the text which have permanent Russian equivalents. What part of the English vocabulary do such words belong to?
II. What equivalents can you suggest to the word "fabric" (sentence 2)? Which of them would you choose while translating this sentence?
III. Should word-for-word translation be used in rendering the English phrases "social evolution" and "mammalian species" (sentence 2)? If not, what syntactical transformations would you suggest?
IV. What kind of equivalent should be used to translate the English idiom "a hard nut to crack" (sentence 1)?
V. Suggest an occasion! Russian substitute for the word "unified" in sen-
tence (2) and explain your solution.
VI. Make a word-for-word translation of sentence (3) and then make it syntactically more acceptable by changing the word order.
VII. Can any of the regular equivalents of the word "solution" fit the context of sentence (5)? If not, what can serve as an occasional substitute?
VIII. Make your choice between the permanent equivalent to the English "deaf" (sentence 7) — глухой and the occasional substitute не воспринимающий звуков. Give your reasons. Suggest a proper substitute for the word "non-literate".
IX. What method would you resort to in order to produce a substitute for the words "pidgins" in sentence (8) and "homo sapiens" in sentence (2)?
X. Use an explanation as an occasional substitute for the phrase "human di-
versity" in sentence (9).
B. Other Translation Problems
XI. Are there any reasons to prefer one of the Russian aspective forms to the other as the substitute for the word "to discuss" in sentence (1) обсудить vs. обсуждать, рассмотреть vs. рассматривать.
XII. Discuss the pros and cons of the following Russian substitutes for the term "homo sapiens" in sentence (2): гомо сапиенс, хомо сапиенс, человек разумный.
XIII. While translating sentence (4) would you choose the Russian verb обходиться or иметь as the substitute for the English "to make do with"? Or would you suggest something else?
XIV. Which of the following Russian words may serve as a substitute for the English "unitary" in sentence (5): унитарный, единый, единственный?
XV. Can the word "universals" in sentence (5) be translated into Russian as универсалии or would you prefer something like общность, единство, etc.?
XVI. What errors can you find in the following translation of sentence (5), if any?
В свете анатомических и нейрофизиологических универсалий
существование единого языка было бы вполне понятным.
XVII. What would you prefer for "there is" in sentence (6) существует, имеется or есть? Give your reasons.
XVIII. Why is the Russian word природный a wrong substitute for the English "natural" in sentence (6)? What is the difference between the words природный, натуральный and естественный?
XIX. Try to show in your Russian translation of sentence (7) the presence of the definite article before the word "planet". Which of the following will you choose — земля, планета, наша планета?
XX. Which of the following Russian words would you prefer as the equivalent to the word "aspects" in sentence (7): аспекты, черты, особенности?
XXI. Which of the Russian substitutes would you prefer for the English "from outside" in sentence (7): извне, из космоса, со стороны?
XXII. Is the meaning of "reporting" in sentence (7) closer to the meaning of the Russian сообщать, докладывать or заключать (приходить к выводу)?
XXIII. Can the regular equivalent of the English verb "to guess" — догадываться be used in translating sentence (8)?
XXIV. Would you use the Russian word полдюжины as a substitute for the English 'Ъа1Г a dozen" in sentence (8) or would you decide in favour of полдесятка, несколько or пять-шесть?
XXV. Would you be satisfied with translating "pidgins" in sentence (8) as пиджин or do you think it necessary to add the word языки? Or may be you will opt for смешанные языки?
XXVI. Can the usual Russian equivalents of the English "duster" in sentence (8) — гроздь, пучок, связка, кисть be applied to such notions as язык or диалект?
XXVII. Would you translate "human diversity" in sentence (9) as человеческое разнообразие, различие между людьми? Or can you suggest something else?
XXVIII. Which of the following is a good substitute for the word "Babel" in sentence (10): Бейбл, Вавилон, Вавилонское столпотворение языков?
XXIX. Translate the word "mystery" in sentence (10) first with a Russian noun and then with an adjective. Which do you find more suitable?
XXX. Would you use an elliptical sentence in Russian to translate sentence (10) or will you fill in the missing words?
CHAPTER 4. ASPECTS OF TRANSLATING PROCESS* Basic Assumptions
Description of the translating process is one of the major tasks of the translation theory. Here we deal with the dynamic aspects of translation trying to understand how the translator performs the transfer operation from ST to TT.
Psychologically viewed, the translating process must needs include two mental processes - understanding and verbalization. First, the translator understands the contents of ST, that is, reduces the information it contains to his own mental program, and then he develops this program into TT. The problem is that these mental processes are not directly observable and we do not know much of what that program is and how the reduction and development operations are performed. That is why the translating process has to be described in some indirect way. The translation theory achieves this aim by postulating a number of translation models.
A model is a conventional representation of the translating process describing mental operations by which the source text or some part of it may be translated, irrespective of whether these operations are actually performed by the translator. It may describe the translating process either in a general form or by listing a number of specific operations (or transformations) through which the process can, in part, be realized. Translation models can be oriented either toward the situation reflected in the ST contents or toward the meaningful components of the ST contents.
The existing models of the translating process are, in fact, based on the same assumptions which we considered in discussing the problem of equivalence, namely, the s i t u a t i о n a 1 (or referential) model is based on the identity of the situations described in the original text and in the translation, and the semantic-transformational model postulates the similarity of basic notions and nuclear structures in different languages. These postulates are supposed to explain the dynamic aspects of translation. In other words, it is presumed that the translator actually makes a mental travel from the original to some interlingual level of equivalence and then further on to the text of translation.
In the situational model this intermediate level is extralinguistic. It is the described reality, the facts of life that are represented by the verbal description. The process of translating presumably consists in the translator getting beyond the original text to the actual situation described in it. This is the first step of the process, i.e. the break-through to the situation. The
See "Theory of Translation", Ch. VII. 30
second step is for the translator to describe this situation in the target language. Thus the process goes from the text in one language through the extralinguistic situation to the text in another language. The translator first understands what the original is about and then says "the same things" in TL.
For instance, the translator reads in A. Cronin's "Citadel" the description of the main character coming by train to a new place of work: "Manson walked quickly down the platform, searching eagerly for some signs of welcome". He tries to understand what reality lies behind the words "searching eagerly for some signs of welcome". The man was alone in a strange place and couldn't expect any welcome committee or deputation. Obviously, he just wanted to see whether anyone was there to meet him. So, the translator describes the situation in Russian in the following way: «Мэнсон быстро прошел по перрону, оглядываясь, не встречает ли его кто-нибудь».
A different approach was used by E. Nida who suggested that the translating process may be described as a series of transformations. The transformational model postulates that in any two languages there is a number of nuclear structures which are fully equivalent to each other. Each language has an area of equivalence in respect to the other language. It is presumed that the translator does the translating in three transformational strokes. First — the stage of analysis — he transforms the original structures into the nuclear structures, i.e. he performs transformation within SL. Second —the stage of translation proper —he replaces the SL nuclear structures with the equivalent nuclear structures in TL. And third —the stage of synthesis — he develops the latter Into the terminal structures in the text of translation.
Thus if the English sentence "It is very strange this domination of our intellect by our digestive organs" (J.K. Jerome) is translated into Russian as «Странно, до какой степени пищеварительные органы властвуют над нашим рассудком» we presume that the structures "domination of our intellect" and "domination by our digestive organs" were first reduced to the nuclear structures "organs dominate" and "they dominate intellect", respectively. Then they were replaced by the equivalent Russian structures «органы властвуют» and «они властвуют над рассудком», after which the nuclear structures were transformed into the final Russian variant.
A similar approach can be used to describe the translation of semantic units. The semantic model postulates the existence of the "deep" semantic categories common to SL and TL. It is presumed that the translator first reduces the semantic units of the original to these basic semantic categories and then expresses the appropriate notions by the semantic units of TL.
Thus if he comes across the sentence "John is the proud owner of a new car", he is first to realize that it actually means that "John has a new car" and that "he is proud because of thaf'. After transferring these basic ideas to Russian and converting them to the semantically acceptable phrases he will get the translation «У Джона (есть) новая машина, которой он очень гордится».
In describing the process of translating we can explain the obtained variants as the result of the translator applying one or all of these models of action. This does not mean that a translation is actually made through the stages suggested by these models. They are not, however, just abstract schemes. Training translators we may teach them to use these models as practical tools. Coming across a specific problem in ST the translator should classify it as situational, structural or semantic and try to solve it by resorting to the appropriate procedure. If, for instance, in the sentence "He is a poor sleeper" the translator sees that the attributive group cannot be directly transferred into Russian, he can find that the transformational model will do the trick for him here and transform the attributive group into a verb-adverb phrase: «Он плохо спит».
Another approach to the description of the process of translating consists in the identification of different types of operations performed by the translator. Here the process is viewed as a number of manipulations with the form or content of the original, as a result of which the translator creates the text in the target language. The type of operation is identified by comparing the initial and the final texts.
The first group of operations (or transformations) is characterized by imitation of the form of a word or of a collocation. In the first case the translator tries to represent the pronunciation or the spelling of the foreign word with the TL letters. Thus we get such translations as «битник», «стриптиз», «эскалация», etc. This method is usually called translational transcription. A number of rules have been formulated as to the choice of Russian letters to represent the English sounds or letters, and the translator is expected to observe them in his work.
hi the second case the translator creates a blueprint collocation in TL by using a loan translation. This results in such forms as «мозговой трест» (bison trust), «работа по правилам» (work-to-rule), «люди доброй воли» (people of good will).
The second group of operations includes all types of lexical transformations involving certain semantic changes. As a result, the meaning of a word or word combination in ST may be made more specific, more general or somewhat modified as a way to discovering an appropriate equivalent in TL.
The choice of a more specific word in translation which gives a more 32
detailed description of the idea than does the word in SL is a very common case in the English-Russian translating process. English often makes use of general terms to describe very definite objects or actions. The following sentence refers to a frightened woman trying to hide from an intruder who had suddenly burst into the room where she was pensively looking into the fire:
My mother had left her chair in her agitation, and gone behind it in the corner. (Ch. Dickens)
An attempt to use regular Russian equivalents for such general English verbs as "to leave" and "to go" will produce a ludicrous Russian phrase like this: «Матушка оставила свое кресло и пошла за него в угол».
То соре with the problem a contextual substitute may be created by using the detailing technique, i.e. by describing how the woman performed those actions instead of just naming them, e.g.:
Взволнованная матушка вскочила со своего кресла и забилась в угол позади него.
One more example. Coming home after a long absence a young boy finds everything changed and no longer his own:
My old dear bedroom was changed, and I was to lie a long way off.
A blueprint Russian translation of this sentence would be hardly intelligible. Why should anyone "lie a long way off' from a bedroom? Obviously, "to lie" means "to go to bed" and "a long way off is in some other part of the same house. If so, why not say it in so many words? This is just the way to produce a contextual substitute:
Моей милой старой спальни уже не было, и я должен был спать в другом конце дома.
The opposite procedure, i.e. the use of an equivalent with a more general meaning, is not so common in translations from English into Russian, e.g.:
I packed my two Gladstones.
Я упаковал свои два чемодана.
For obvious reasons the translator preferred a generic name to the specific name of the kind of suitcase that the Russian reader is unfamiliar with.
Another type of lexical transformations is often called "modulation". It involves the creation of an equivalent by replacing a unit in SL with a TL unit the meaning of which can be logically deduced from it and which is just
2 - 234 33
another way of referring to the same object or an aspect of the same situation. Consider the following sentence:
Manson slung his bag up and climbed into a battered gig behind a tall, angular black horse. (A. Cronin)
It confronts the translator with a number of problems. First, what should be said in Russian for "to sling a bag up"? Second, in Russian it seems so obvious that one gets into a gig behind and not in front of the horse that any mention of the fact is preposterous unless it is implied that the horse was in the gig, too. Third, "an angular horse" cannot be either «угловая» or «угловатая лошадь».
All these translation problems can be solved with the help of contextual substitutes. "Slinging the bag up" evidently implies that the bag was placed into the gig, "climbing into the gig behind the horse" certainly means that this horse was harnessed to the gig and "an angular horse" is probably a horse with bones sticking out at angles, i.e. a bony or skinny animal. The Russian translation can therefore express these derived ideas to describe the identical situation, e.g.:
Мэнсон поставил свой чемодан и влез в расхлябанную двуколку, запряженную крупной костлявой черной лошадью.
In such cases the substitute often has a cause-and-effect relationship with the original:
The window was full of clothes I wouldn't want to be seen dead in.
В витрине были выставлены платья, в которых я не хотела бы даже лежать в гробу.
A dead person is usually put in a coffin and "to be seen dead in a dress" logically implies lying in the coffin in such a dress. One more example.
People who have tried it, tell me that a clear conscience makes you very happy and contented. (J.K. Jerome)
A direct translation of "who have tried it" is hardly possible. But if somebody has tried something he has some experience about it. So, the translation may run as follows:
Некоторые люди, ссылаясь на собственный опыт, утверждают, что чистая совесть делает человека веселым и счастливым.
The third group of translating procedures comprises all types of transformations involving units of SL grammar. The translator may solve his problems by preserving the syntactic structure of the source text and 34
using the analogous TL grammatical forms or "a word-for-word translation". This may be called "a zero transformation" and can be easily exemplified, e.g.:
John took Mary by the hand. Джон взял Мери за руку.
In other cases the translator may resort to various types of grammatical substitutes.
First, we may mention two types of transformations which change the number of sentences in TT as compared to ST.
As a rule, the translator renders the original text sentence by sentence and the number of sentences remains the same. However, it may so happen that the structural and semantic problems of a translation event can be best solved by breaking an original sentence into two parts, i.e. translating it with two sentences in TL. Another type of such partitioning is to replace a simple sentence in the original with a complex one in the translation, comprising one or several subordinate clauses.
The problems that can be solved through this technique are varied. First of all it may come handy in dealing with the English syntactic complexes which pack in two subject-predicate units, each unit making up a sentence or a clause in the Russian translation, e.g.:
I want you to speak English.
Я хочу, чтобы вы говорили по-английски.
She hates his behaving in this way.
Ей очень не нравится, что он так себя ведет.
The partitioning of sentences in translation can also be used to overcome the difficulties caused by the idiomatic semantic structure of the original text, e.g.:
This was a man to be seen to be understood.
Чтобы понять этого человека, надо было его увидеть.
Sometimes the translator can prefer partitioning to the other possible methods of translation, as producing a variant more suitable stylistically or emotionally. Consider the following examples:
The annual surveys of the Labour Government were not discussed with the workers at any stage, but only with the employers.
The contrast in the last part of the sentence can be best reproduced in Russian by making a separate unit of it, e.g.:
Ежегодные обзоры лейбористского правительства не обсужда-
лись среди рабочих ни на каком этапе. Они обсуждались только с предпринимателями.
And this is how this procedure can be used to reproduce the emotional implications of the original:
How well I recollect it, on a cold grey afternoon, with a dull sky, threatening rain. (Ch. Dickens)
Как хорошо помню я наш приезд! Вечереет, холодно, пасмурно, хмурое небо грозит дождем.
The opposite procedure means integrating two or more original sentences into one or compressing a complex sentence into a simple one. This technique is also used both for structural and semantic reasons.
Sometimes one of the sentences is grammatically too incomplete to warrant its separate reproduction in translation:
It is not possible to do the work in two days. Nor is it necessary. Выполнить эту работу за два дня нет ни возможности, ни необходимости.
The integration procedure may be necessitated by close semantic ties between adjacent sentences:
We did not want scenery. We wanted to have our supper and go to bed. Мы не хотели красивых пейзажей —мы хотели поужинать и лечь спать.
The partitioning and integration procedures may be used together, resulting in a kind of syntactic and semantic reshuffle of sentences in translation. Here is an example:
But occasionally an indiscretion takes place, such as that of Mr. Woodrow Wyatt, Labour M.P., when Financial Secretary to the War Office. He boasted of the prowess of British spies in obtaining information regarding armed forces of the USSR. (J. Gollan) ^
The end of the first sentence is replaced by the personal pronoun in the second sentence. The sentence can, therefore, be broken into two and its last part integrated with the second sentence, e.g.:
Однако по временам допускается нескромность. Так, например, лейборист, член парламента Вудро Уайтт в бытность свою финансовым секретарем военного министерства хвастался ловкостью, проявленной английскими шпионами в деле получения сведений о вооруженных силах СССР.
Another type of grammatical transformations is characterized by the 36
translator's refusal to use analogous grammatical units in TT. He tries to render the meaning of SL units by changing the grammatical form of a word, the part of speech or the type of the sentence. Such changes are very common and the translator should never hesitate to use them whenever necessary. Here are some examples:
We are searching for talent everywhere. Мы повсюду ищем таланты. I am a very rapid packer. Я очень быстро укладываюсь. It is our hope that an agreement will be reached by Friday. Мы надеемся, что к пятнице будет достигнуто соглашение. Не does not mind your joining our group.
Он ничего не имеет против того, чтобы вы присоединились к нашей группе.
Finally, there is a group of transformations which ensure the required degree of equivalence by a number of changes of both lexical and grammatical nature. They involve a different arrangement of ideas, a different point of view and other semantic modifications whenever a direct translation of a SL unit proves impossible. A typical example of such a procedure is the so-called antonymous translation describing the situation, as it were, from the opposite point of view and rendering an affirmative SL structure by a negative TL one or vice versa:
The door was not unbolted. Дверь была на засове.
A complex change also occurs in explicatory translations in which a SL unit is replaced by a TL word combination describing or defining its meaning:
A demonstration of British conservationists was held in Trafalgar Square yesterday.
Вчера на Трафальгар-сквер состоялась демонстрация английских сторонников охраны окружающей среды.
In conclusion, we should mention one more specific procedure which may come handy to the translator when he is baffled by an apparently un-solvable translation problem. It may be called the compensation technique and is defined as a deliberate introduction of some additional elements in translation to make up for the loss of similar elements at the same or an earlier stage. For instance, Eliza in B. Shaw's 'Tygmalion" makes a mistake typical for the speech of an uneducated person: 'Tm nothing to you — not so much as them slippers." And Professor Higgins corrects her saying: "those
slippers". The linguistic error in the episode is untranslatable and its loss makes this dialogue meaningless. But the loss can be compensated for by introducing a mistake — and its correction — at a point where everything is correct in the original but where an uneducated Russian speaker is likely to make it. As a result in the translation Eliza says: «Я для вас ничто, хуже вот этих туфлей»; And Higgins can self-righteously correct her: «туфель».
The compensation method is often used to render the stylistic or emotional implications of the original. Consider the following example.
They had reached the mysterious mill where the red tape was spun, and Yates was determined to cut through it here and now. (S. Heym)
"Red tape" is translated as "bureaucracy but the latter cannot be spun at a mill. And the translator invents his own figure of speech to compensate for the loss:
Они уперлись в стену штабной бюрократии, но Йейтс твердо решил тут же пробить эту стену.
Suggested Topics for Discussion
1. What is traditionally meant by "translation"? What is the translating process? What mental processes make up the translating process?
2. How can the translating process be studied and described? What is a model of translation? How can translation models be classified? What are the strong and the weak points of translation modelling?
3. What are the relationships between the contents of a text and extralinguistic realities? What is meant by the "situation"? How does the situational model describe the translating process?
4. What are the basic assumptions of the semantic-transformational model of translation? What types of transformations can be used in the translating process? Do all such transformations involve semantic shifts?
5. What transformations are oriented towards the form of the SL units? What is the difference between transcription and transliteration? How are transcription and transliteration used in the translating process? What are loan translations?
6. What are the main types of lexical transformations? Do lexical transformations imply semantic changes? How can the logical operations of specification and generalization be used in the translating process? What is modulation?
7. What are the main types of grammatical transformations? What is a word-for-word (blueprint) translation? What are the characteristic features
of the partitioning and integration techniques? In what way can grammatical units be transformed in the translating process?
8. What are complex translation transformations? What is the technique of antonymous translation? What is the role of compensation in translation?
Text
THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME
(1) Until the close of World War II active speculation about the technological features of the future was restricted in the main to the literature of science fiction. (2) This literature was regarded until then as an exhilarating avenue of escape from the humdrum of the all-too-solid present. (3) Undeterred by premonitions, the reader's imagination could soar freely through time and space. (4) He might even smile at the naive reassurance provided by some of the tales of such pioneers of the genre as Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, in which contemporary society continued to move soporifi-cally along its customary grooves undetected by the cataclysmic discoveries of some scientific maniac. (5) And what could be cosier than a Wellsian time machine that, following a fearsome trip into the far future, could be depended upon to return the author to the present in good time for tea around the parlour fire? (6) It is this once-powerful sense of the here-and-now that has begun to recede since the War. (7) Much that was only yesterday relegated airily to the realm of science fiction is now recognized as sober scientific fact. (8) And there is virtually nothing in today's science fiction that is thought of as "impossible" tomorrow. (9) The increasing pace of technological and social change in the post-war world is actively dissolving the familiar signposts of our civilization before our media-soaked eyes. (10) Willingly or reluctantly we are impelled to give more and more of our attention to the shape of things to come.
Text Analysis
(1) What is a speculation? Does it differ from profiteering? How can a speculation be active? Is there any difference between "technology" and "technique"? Or between "technological" and "technical"?
(2) How can "an avenue of escape" be paraphrased? Does "humdrum" here mean "monotony, "boredom" or something else? In what sense can the present be said to be "solid"? Does one need the rest of the text to understand the meaning of this word in the sentence?
(3) What derivatives of "to deter" can you recall? Is a premonition a pleasant feeling? How are the words "imagination" and "imaginative" used in modern English? In what way do they differ from 'fancy" and "fanciful"?
(4) Why is "reassurance" referred to as "naive"? What does "soporifically" mean? Has the word "cataclysmic" a positive or a negative connotation?
(5) In what sense is the time machine "cosy"? How can the phrase "can be depended upon to do smth." be paraphrased? What is the parlour fire? What idea is implied in mentioning "tea around the parlour fire"? Why is "the author" referred to as the traveller in the time machine?
(6) What does "the here-and-now" mean?
(7) What is the connotation of the word "airily"? Does it imply easiness or light-mindedness? Why is a scientific fact called "sober"?
(8) Why is the word "impossible" used here in inverted commas?
(9) What is "a signpost of civilization"? How can anything be dissolved "actively? When do we say that something is done Before our eyes"? What are mass media? What is the figurative meaning of "to soak"? What do mass media soak people with? Is it good or bad that our eyes are "media-soaked"?
(10) Does "to be impelled" mean "to be forced" or "to be inclined"? Is there any difference between "future" and "things to come"? Does "the shape of things to come" mean "what will future be like" or something else?
Problem-Solving Exercises
A. Types of Transformations
I. Identify the types of transformations related to the translating process of
sentence (1):
До конца второй мировой войны о технических достиженияхв будущем любили порассуждатьлишь авторы научно-фантастических произведений.
II. Translate sentences (1) and (2) employing the method of syntactic inte-
gration. Give some arguments for or against its use.
III. Find two other sentences in the text where this transformation can be easily employed.
IV. Is it possible to render the subject-predicate group in sentence (1) word-for-word, e.g.... рассуждения ограничивались литературой? If not, what other way can you suggest?
V. While translating sentence (3) choose between the word-for-word translation of "the reader's imagination" and the transformed wording: читатель в своем воображении .... Give your reasons.
VI. Evaluate the use of modulation and transcription in the following translation of sentence (4):