Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

More documents

Recommendations

Info

“Unique items” in learners’ translations 197 Table 6. Students’ proposals for the missing words, clozes “kinos” and “hanki” “kinos” First choice Second choice Third choice Total/N = 38: kinos 11 1 – 12 lumikinos 3 3 lumikasa, lumikeko, lumivalli, 11 2 1 14 lumipenkka (‘snowdrift’/ ‘snowbank’) keko, valli, kasa, penkka 11 4 2 17 (‘drift’ / ‘bank’) others: ura (‘trail’), weather 2 2 – 4 “hanki” hanki 11 – – 11 lumihanki 2 2 kinos 6 1 – 7 lumipenkka, lumikasa, lumivalli 3 1 – 4 lumi (‘snow’) 6 6 penkka (“bank”) 2 2 others: loska, sohjo (‘slush’), 6 3 9 kiinni (‘stuck’), pelto (‘field’), ditch “no answer” 2 2 difference between the translated and non-translated language use becomes clearer, if the frequent use of kinos as an adequate situational synonym for hanki is taken into consideration. Furthermore, it is interesting to observe that in this non-translational cloze test the slightly tautological synonyms lumikinos and lumihanki as well as other compounds are less frequent than in students’ translations. In addition, cloze test wordings include situational equivalents like keko, penkka and valli (‘drift’ or‘bank’)aswellassuchrealiaasloska and sohjo (‘slush’), which both refer to the element of “snow” in this particular scene, and are practically not at all manifested in translations. 7. Concluding remarks Together these observations on novice translators’ translated and non-translated language use are but one example of the functions of the “law of
198 Pekka Kujamäki interference” (Toury 1995:275), i.e. the hypotheses about the influence of the source text surface structure on translated target-language use. Conditioned by the source text, learners’ translation processes produce a distinct distribution of lexical choices that give the target text “a taste of translationese” (Tirkkonen- Condit 2002:12) and in any case make the text semantically more explicit than their non-translated expressions. As such these results comply with earlier findings on features of translated language, whether obtained from empirical tests on novices or professionals (e.g. Snell-Hornby 1983) or from research on larger corpora of authentic translated or non-translated texts (e.g. Olohan & Baker 2000; Eskola, this volume; Tirkkonen-Condit 2000 and this volume). It is therefore convenient to sum up the results of this experiment with Toury’s comment on the data provided by Snell-Hornby’s above mentioned experiment: It would seem, then, that even people who are well aware of so-called native “situational equivalents”, and use them in comparable native-like situations, tend to ignore them as translational replacements, even if they are trained to try and establish translation relationships on the highest possible level (as the subjects of this experiment, being students of translation in a modern institute, definitely were). To me this is highly indicative of the fact that the very need to “communicate in translated utterances” (Toury 1980) imposes patterns of its own, a statement which certainly deserves some more consideration – and specification. In experimental methods too. (Toury 1991:50, my italics) Toury’s conclusion is easy to agree with. With respect to classroom practice I would like to add, as implied by the added italics above, that such observations are also pedagogically relevant: is it really the case that our students try to establish translation relationships on the highest possible level? If we take, once more, a look at the students’ translations, it is easy to see that the translations that did not use, for example, the Finnish realia keli share one feature, namely the semantic component “condition”, which was manifested in the source texts either as (-)verhältnisse or as conditions. Aspointed out in the beginning, it is a semantic component that is not expressed in the Finnish word. All in all, the students’ target texts imply an adherence to a concept of translation that involves an understanding and rendering of words or, at best, of sentences rather than texts let alone scenes behind the source text’s linguistic surface. Seen from the perspective of the control test, it seems that students are unable or reluctant to “dive” into the context and exploit it for reconstructing the situation and for releasing themselves of the SL-surface structure to fully construct the scene or the mental model involved in the text. Hence students do not find natural TL frames for the given scene. In research
Page 2 and 3:
Translation Universals
Page 4 and 5:
Translation Universals Do they exis
Page 6 and 7:
Table of contents Introduction 1 I.
Page 8 and 9:
Introduction The search for univers
Page 10 and 11:
Introduction 3 the main methodologi
Page 12 and 13:
Introduction 5 tious corpus would w
Page 14 and 15:
Introduction 7 of several frequent
Page 16 and 17:
Introduction 9 For many, the term u
Page 18:
Introduction 11 Toury, Gideon (1991
Page 22 and 23:
Probabilistic explanations in trans
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Beyond the particular* Andrew Chest
Page 42 and 43:
Beyond the particular 35 6. A trans
Page 44 and 45:
Beyond the particular 37 characteri
Page 46 and 47:
Beyond the particular 39 Contributi
Page 48 and 49:
Beyond the particular 41 A crucial
Page 50 and 51:
Beyond the particular 43 representa
Page 52 and 53:
Beyond the particular 45 or unclear
Page 54 and 55:
Beyond the particular 47 What we ne
Page 56:
Beyond the particular 49 Schulte, R
Page 59 and 60:
52 Silvia Bernardini and Federico Z
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 72 and 73:
Corpora, universals and interferenc
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Untypical frequencies in translated
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106:
Page 109 and 110:
102 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Mauranen (
Page 111 and 112:
104 Jarmo Harri Jantunen 2.2 Lexica
Page 113 and 114:
106 Jarmo Harri Jantunen eighth day
Page 115 and 116:
108 Jarmo Harri Jantunen second pha
Page 117 and 118:
110 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Figure 2.
Page 119 and 120:
112 Jarmo Harri Jantunen synonymous
Page 121 and 122:
114 Jarmo Harri Jantunen items comp
Page 123 and 124:
116 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Table 4. T
Page 125 and 126:
118 Jarmo Harri Jantunen translatio
Page 127 and 128:
120 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Table 7. T
Page 129 and 130:
122 Jarmo Harri Jantunen However, t
Page 131 and 132:
124 Jarmo Harri Jantunen 13. The bo
Page 133 and 134:
126 Jarmo Harri Jantunen Mauranen,
Page 136 and 137:
Translation-specific lexicogrammar?
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148:
Page 151 and 152:
144 Vilma Pápai It is in the last
Page 153 and 154: 146 Vilma Pápai Table 1. Summary o
Page 155 and 156: 148 Vilma Pápai (Sinclair 1991:13-
Page 157 and 158: 150 Vilma Pápai Table 2. Summary o
Page 159 and 160: 152 Vilma Pápai 4.1.2 Shifts on th
Page 161 and 162: 154 Vilma Pápai part of speech and
Page 163 and 164: 156 Vilma Pápai his former prison
Page 165 and 166: 158 Vilma Pápai Table 4. Frequency
Page 167 and 168: 160 Vilma Pápai In addition, consi
Page 169 and 170: 162 Vilma Pápai PA Porter, A. 1997
Page 171 and 172: 164 Vilma Pápai Ishikawa, Luli (19
Page 173 and 174: 166 Tiina Puurtinen (1996) and Bake
Page 175 and 176: 168 Tiina Puurtinen (1) Hän katsoi
Page 177 and 178: 170 Tiina Puurtinen conditional: jo
Page 179 and 180: 172 Tiina Puurtinen Table 2. Occurr
Page 181 and 182: 174 Tiina Puurtinen (5) Lisko voisi
Page 183 and 184: 176 Tiina Puurtinen Mauranen, Anna
Page 185 and 186: 178 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit equivale
Page 187 and 188: 180 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit Table 1.
Page 189 and 190: 182 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit do not t
Page 191 and 192: 184 Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit Östman,
Page 194 and 195: What happens to “unique items”
Page 196 and 197: “Unique items” in learners’ t
Page 212 and 213: The fate of “The Families of Mede
Page 214 and 215: Thefateof“TheFamiliesofMedellín
Page 222 and 223: Author index A Adab 1 Aijmer 131 Al
Page 224: Author index 217 Schäffner 1, 38,
Page 227 and 228: 220 Subject index G generalization
Page 229 and 230: In the BENJAMINS TRANSLATION LIBRAR
Page 231: 47. SAWYER, David B.: Fundamental A
show all

Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?