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)
Some further considerations regarding the theoretical groundwork
100 the translation of the Odyssey (because it belongs to the character of the epic) if it is translated as a work of art. Even comments by later editors are often deleted (or put in brackets). Cf. also Thierfelder’s (1961) remarks on his translation of the Eunuchus by Terence. Paepcke emphasizes how important the kind of coherence we are referring to is for the translatum, regardless of the referential content. For translating, which lies somewhere between following the rules and playing, we may state that a translation which uses the target language in the most idiomatic way provides the translated text with exactly the level of assurance that produces the coherence any text should be allowed to claim for itself from the start. 49 To illustrate this point, Paepcke ([1981]1986: 129-33) gives us an extensive example taken from Camus, Le langage d’une morale virile, German title: Die Sprache der Zivilcourage, English title: Man, Morals and Morale (trans. Andrew Jenkins). A failure to achieve coherence in translations may be due to the translator’s carelessness (we shall not consider ignorance as a possible reason at this point), but it may also occur if the translator, while sticking to the assumed meaning of a word, loses sight of the sense of the text as a whole. A third cause may be that the translator does not take into account the differences in the back- ground knowledge of the source and target recipients. As we know, coherence is established by linking cultural and factual with linguistic knowledge, i.e. through cultural and linguistic ‘competence’. We can find a good example of this in Homer’s Odyssey ( chapter 1 .16, verses 439-40): ἡ μὲν τὸν πτύξασα καὶ ἀσκήσασα χιτῶνα, πασσάλῳ ἀγκρεμάσασα παρὰ τρητοῖσι λέχεσσι Murray (Homer 1919) translates this as: And she folded and smoothed the tunic and hung it on a peg beside the corded bedstead. A similar incoherence can be found in Butler’s translation (Homer 1898), as well as in various German versions (e.g. Hampe 1977, Schadewaldt 1958 and 49 Man kann also für das Übersetzen zwischen Regel und Spiel feststellen, daß die Überset- zung, die sich am sichersten in der Idiomatik der Zielsprache bewegt, dem übersetzten Text eine Orientierungssicherheit gibt, die jene Verständlichkeit erzeugt, die ein Text zunächst für sich beanspruchen darf. (Paepcke [1981]1986: 128) (Paepcke [1981]1986: 128) Katharina Reiß and Hans J. Vermeer 101 Voß 1781). It is caused by cultural presuppositions. For us, it would not make sense to fold a dress or a tunic first and hang it on a peg afterwards because then the dress or tunic would unfold immediately! What was Homer referring to? The solution: a tunic can be folded and then hung over a rack that juts out from the side of a wardrobe or, as in this example, a bedstead, just as we may hang a pair of trousers over the back of a chair or as Indian women may fold their saris and hang them over the cross bar of a coat hanger. An interaction is successful if it is interpreted by the recipients as sufficiently coherent with their situation and if there is no protest, in any form whatsoever, with regard to its transmission, the language used and its sense: M trl.p ⊆ sit R i.e. it must be possible for the message (M) produced by the translator (trl.p), i.e. the translatum, to be interpreted coherently (⊆) in the situation (sit) of the target recipient (R). Translational action, therefore, is subject to the same conditions as inter- action in general. The rule has been intentionally worded in a very general and provocative way. It is not possible to demand that a translation be perfect. There is no such thing as ‘the’ optimal translation. All we can do is strive for what seems to be the optimum under the circumstances in question. The above rule also serves to relativize the frequent demand for ‘objective correctness’ in translation. Many translations are deficient, but some of them have actually been ‘successful’, e.g. in the sense that they have become best- sellers although they were deficient when compared with the source text in light of their skopos. Not that we would defend botched work. For example: a particularly bad example seems to be the German translation of Norman Mailer’s novel The Naked and the Dead. In our assessment of coherence in translation, we are distinguishing between two aspects: firstly, and, perhaps in most cases, primarily, the translatum is assessed on its own; secondly, a translatum is assessed with regard to the source text. These are two different types of assessment (cf. Reiß [1971]2000 on the distinction between source-text independent and source-text based criticism). We therefore claim that the assessment of intratextual coherence takes precedence over the assessment of ‘fidelity’ between the source and the target Some further considerations regarding the theoretical groundwork 102 texts ( 6.3.). Toury (1980a: 29) implicitly refers to this hierarchy when he writes: ‘acceptability as a translation’ is not necessarily a function of ad- equacy, or of adequacy alone. In other words, the establishment of a differentiated class of translations is not necessarily done solely on the basis of the genesis of these texts […], but also – maybe even mainly – because of some features inherent in them (cf. also Toury 1980a: 29, note 12). 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