Microsoft Word Revised Syllabus Ver doc

Translation and Syntactic Patterns
It is the idea or the concept that is more important than the syntactic structure using 
which the idea or concept is said in the source language. It is incorrect to think that the same 
syntactic pattern as used in the source language must be employed in the target language. If 
we accept that syntactic structure is unimportant, then it becomes evident that any concept 
conveyed in the source language can be completely and accurately translated into target 
language. Pondering over the search for an appropriate equivalent for translation will yield no 
fruits. On the contrary, a moment's thought on how to express the concept in the target 
language effectively, may yield fruitful results.

---

152 
For instance, let us see the problem in the translation of the English word snow into 
their language. If we are translating the phrase 'white as snow' into a language where there is 
no word to refer to snow, there is no sense in referring to snow: because the speakers might 
not have had first hand information about snow. How can there be a word to refer to the item 
snow in a language which is spoken in a place where there is no snow at all? If there is no 
word to refer to snow in the language, how is it possible to translate the above phrase into 
that language? This problem can be solved in a number of ways. First and foremost, even 
when there is no snow in the region where certain languages are spoken, most of the 
languages do have a separate word to refer to snow, for the users of those languages might 
have heard about it. Second, in some areas, the people might not have seen snow but may be 
familiar about them. And it is likely that they use one and the same word to refer to both 
snow and fog. Third, in most languages, we find there are equivalents for that word. For 
instance, we may use the phrases 'white as milk' or 'white as the feather of duck' or 'white as 
funguses (if white fungus is prevalent in that region) or else, instead of using any of the above 
similes, it may be simply described as white. What is important here is saying something is 
white and not mentioning snow.
When two individuals are conversing in one and the same language, it cannot be 
accepted and established that communication, that is, transfer of ideas takes place completely. 
This is essential because of the reason that no two persons understand the same message in 
the same manner under all circumstances. Most of the time, the same message is understood 
by two persons in two different ways. Hardly, moreover, we come across with the words 
which can exactly substitute the words in another language. How can one get equivalents for 
the Tamil words pa:sam, paRRu, ka:tal, anpu, ne:sam, piriyam etc. in another language? 
Which word in other language can exactly substitute the Tamil words viluppun, vaTakkiru, 
maTale:Ru, etc. which speak about the valiant and romantic life of the ancient Tamils? In 
same manner the English words canter, gallop, trot, etc refer to the different places in the 
movement of the horse. These differences cannot be effectively brought out in all other 
languages. There may be still more words in Arabic to describe the paces of movement of 
horses, it being the native language of the land to which horses also belong.
Sometimes, the form of the message conveyed may also prove to be important. While 
playing with words or while punning, it is the form of the message that is important. Any 
change in the form of the message may drastically affect the meaning or content. Translating 
these constructions from a source language to a target language is a difficult task. The puns in 
the works of Tamil poet Kalamegam, the two-in-ones in the constructions such as 
talaivitivasam having two meanings namely "lady's death anniversary" / "owing to my 
destiny" or the word amaappillai meaning "mother's son" / "that bridegroom", etc which are 
very peculiar to Tamils should be translated along with a translator's note wherein these 
things are explained. Similarly, in the verse translation it is hardly possible to recapture the 
same similes, rhyming, metaphors, etc. Hence, in this case the concept of the verse has to be 
preserved at the cost of these ornamentations. The concept, after all, is the most important 
part of a verse. Inclusion of the above ornamentations in the verse translation is a perquisite. 
One cannot expect the same similes, puns, metaphors, etc., of the source material in the 
translation.