Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

322.2.1.1. Langue and parole[Q1] “At what level of organization should we look for the entities between which therelationship [of equivalence] obtains?”While studying equivalence, the first important aspect that needs to be examined is thatof the levels at which equivalence can be formulated. Is equivalence a systemic orinterlingual phenomenon because language is viewed as a system? Is equivalence atextual or intertextual phenomenon because language is viewed as a text? Or isequivalence both systemic and textual?Adamska-Sałaciak (2010) explains that this distinction is based on the differentapproaches taken by translation studies and by lexicography. Using the Saussurriandistinction between langue and parole, generally, in translation studies, equivalence isseen as a phenomenon belonging to the level of parole because it has to do withinstantiations of language in texts. In contrast, in lexicography, equivalence is seen as aphenomenon that belongs to the level of langue in that the equivalence relationship onlyexists between units (words or expressions) that are given in a lexicographic product.Despite the distinction between systemic and textual levels, Adamska-Sałaciak (2010)rightly points out that, at first sight, one would think that lexicographic equivalencemust be formulated at the systemic level but, in fact, it is formulated at both levels.We remind the reader that Zgusta (1971: 294) wrote that ―the basic purpose of abilingual dictionary is to coordinate with the lexical units of one language those lexicalunits of another language which are equivalent in their lexical meaning‖ (systemiclevel). However, as Adamska-Sałaciak (2010: 388) notes, with the use of corporalexicographers have come to apply both types of equivalence, ―the intertextual typeappearing in those instances where the source language (henceforth, SL) unit to beprovided with an equivalent is larger than a single word‖. Wiegand (2002: 245) takes amore radical position by arguing that: