Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home
Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home
Translation Universals.pdf - ymerleksi - home
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
78 Anna Mauranen<br />
Table 3. English and Russian <strong>Translation</strong>s compared to mixed source languages and<br />
original Finnish<br />
Mixed source languages<br />
Originals<br />
Freq. Band English Russian Σ English Russian Σ<br />
1–30 63 71 134 75 96 171<br />
50–79 190 115 305 87 178 265<br />
100–129 104 51 155 167 77 244<br />
Σ 357 237 594 329 351 680<br />
Table 4. English and Russian <strong>Translation</strong>s compared to original Finnish<br />
Originals<br />
Freq. Band English Russian Σ<br />
1–30 75 96 171<br />
50–79 87 178 265<br />
100–129 167 77 244<br />
Σ 329 351 680<br />
TL originals cannot be reduced to SL-specific interference. At the same time,<br />
there is a clear profile difference between the source languages: while English<br />
SL texts deviate less from Finnish originals than from other translations,<br />
translations from Russian show the reverse tendency. This suggests traces of SLspecific<br />
interference. Thus, the results are compatible with the interpretation<br />
that interference is universal. In sum, the present findings suggest that overall,<br />
translations resemble each other more than original target language texts, but a<br />
clear source language effect is also discernible. This implies that transfer is one<br />
of the causes behind the special features of translated language.<br />
Finally, what about the differences between translations from English and<br />
from Russian? The hypothesis was that Russian SL texts should deviate less<br />
from original Finnish than English SL texts because there should be a greater<br />
tolerance in the culture for English than Russian interference. In fact, if we<br />
compare them (Table 4 is a repeat of the right-hand side of Table 3 above),<br />
we notice that Russian deviates more from original Finnish, not less. Thus the<br />
hypothesis of more deviation being accepted from a prestige culture receives<br />
no support from this data.<br />
Obviously, there is the weakness that there is less data from Russian. This<br />
in itself of course shows that the prestige value of Russian is lower, but as things<br />
stand, this bias cannot be hoped to be corrected; it is probably endemic. Getting<br />
equal amounts of data from more peripheral and more central source cultures