Towards a General Theory of Translational Action : Skopos Theory Explained
Download 1.78 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
Towards a General Theory of Translational Action Skopos Theory Explained by Katharina Reiss, Hans J Vermeer (z-lib.org) (2)
- Bu sahifa navigatsiya:
- 10.5.1 Types of translation
10.5 The concept of adequacy
This distinction is necessary because translating as ‘information about an of fer of information’ often aims at providing only partial information about an information offer produced in a source language. It may even be impossible to provide full information about the information offer of the source text if, for example, in the case of old or ancient texts, not all aspects of the original information can be inferred by modern recipients. 10.5.1 Types of translation This problem can be examined in the context of different types of translation, some of which we shall discuss in the following sections. 10.5.2 Adequacy with regard to partial dimensions of a text A translational action is governed by its purpose (skopos) ( 4.1.). The many 57 Ziel einer Übersetzung ist die Äquivalenz von Ausgangstext und Zieltext. (Königs 1981: 8�; emphasis added by the authors) 58 Jede Übersetzung wird beanspruchen, ihrem Original äquivalent zu sein. (Lehmann 1981: (Lehmann 1981: Lehmann 1981: 288, emphasis added by the authors) mphasis added by the authors) Equivalence and adequacy 124 different translational purposes which are possible imply that there are many possible translation strategies for one text. When studying unknown languages, for example, researchers may draw on wordforword (interlinear) translations of a text written in the language they want to investigate. This translation type can help them to identify and represent the structural specificities of this language, which may be slightly or completely different from the researcher’s own language. This translation type was even used in foreign language text books until well into the 20th century, e.g. in the teaching materials for the ToussaintLangenscheidt Method, in order to provide the learners with an aid for text comprehension. It was also used for early translations of the Bible, where translators regarded each word, and the order in which words occurred in the text, as ‘sacred’ and therefore inviolable. The result of this strategy is not an equivalent of the source text, as the original could be used directly for communicative purposes in the source culture, whereas the interlinear version is often incomprehensible for a reader who is not familiar with the source language. However, it is clear that, by providing information about the source text words and syntax in the target language, this translation type is absolutely appropriate for the aims and purposes of this kind of translation process. A literal translation which, unlike the interlinear version, observes the norms and rules of the target language system is still being used in foreign language teaching in many parts of the world today (= grammar translation). This translation type is intended to demonstrate the language competence of the learners and check whether they have correctly understood the lexical, grammatical and stylistic elements of the foreign language and are able to render their meaning correctly in their own language (and vice versa). In this translation type, adequacy with regard to the (limited) goal is also aimed at. 59 A philological translation (Güttinger 196�: 28, speaks of a “gelehrte”, i.e. scholarly, translation) is in line with Schleiermacher’s postulate “to move the reader towards the author”. It aims at informing the target reader about how the sourcetext author communicated with the readers of the source text. In order to achieve this aim, the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic dimensions of the sourcetext linguistic signs are ‘imitated’ to such an extent that the target language may seem completely unnatural to the target audience. The resulting text will be adequate or appropriate with regard to the goal set, but it will definitely not be equivalent with regard to the source text, which sounds natural to the sourceculture readers and does not foreignize their language. During the long history of translating, this translation type has been regarded as the ideal of translation in general, especially for certain text types, such as philosophical texts or literary works of art (cf. Toury 1980a: 117). Today, the ideal would seem to be what we call a ‘communicative’ transla 59 This is the type of translation used for the glosses and backtranslations in the examples given in this book. ((Translator’s note) Katharina Reiß and Hans J. Vermeer 125 tion, in which the targetlanguage offer of information ‘imitates’ the sourcetext offer of information ( �.9.2.). In this translation type, the target text does not feel like a translation, at least not with regard to the language it uses; rather, it is a translation that can achieve the same functions as the original text and can be used directly for (everyday, literary or aesthetic) communication, as it is (as far as is possible) an equivalent of the original text with regard to all of its dimensions (syntax, semantics, pragmatics). The widespread preference for ‘communicative’ translations today (at least if a text permits this type of translation) may be due to the fact that in the international fields of economics, politics, and science, the translation of nonliterary or ‘pragmatic’ texts repre sents a much higher percentage than the translation of literary texts (especially of those considered to be highly artistic). Moreover, even literary translations are read by many more readers today who expect a translation ‘to read like an original’. It is only in this particular case where the adequacy or appropriate ness of the selection of linguistic signs is geared towards the achievement of equivalence at text level. Only a translation of this type can legitimately be assessed according to its equivalence relationship with the source text. Finally, there is the ‘creative’ translation – although such creativity may also be required of the translator from time to time in the communicative translation type. The ‘creative’ translation can be identified as a separate type where certain concepts, ways of thinking, ideas, objects, etc. do not exist in the target culture so that the translator has to create new terms with which to refer to them. This may be the case for certain religious, philosophical and technical texts if there is a difference with regard to cultural or technological developments between the source and the target cultures. When new concepts, ways of thinking, ideas and objects are introduced into the target culture, the potential for new word formation is exploited, often by the initial translator of such texts (for example, in the case of Luther’s translation of the Bible into German). In such cases, the translator must make a great deal of effort to produce an adequate translation; often, adequacy is achieved only after a number of attempts (e.g. the many different translations of the works of James Joyce, Martin Heidegger, and Sigmund Freud). It is logical that an equivalent translation would be impossible in such cases as members of the target culture do not (yet) possess the same background knowledge as members of the source culture; therefore, the translatum can hardly achieve the same communicative function as the source text. Download 1.78 Mb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2025
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling