language-Culture-language-Culture-and-Translatingand-TranslatingBrief IntroductionLanguage, Culture, and Translating has its origin in a series of lectures on translating given at the SISU in the spring of 1989 and later that same year at the Maurice Thorez Institute of Languages and Translating in Moscow. The approach is essentially practical, although the principal theories oftranslating are discussed in Chapter 10.This book has four main emphases: (1) the need to understand thoroughlythe source text, (2) the close relation between language and culture, (3) the necessity to focus attention on style and discourse, and (4) therelevance of insights coming from several different disciplines. (1) The need to understand thoroughly the source text:Since a majority of failures in translating seemingly result from an inadequate understanding of the text in the source language, three chapters are given to describethe crucial semantic and formal features of lexemes(words and idioms), syntax, and discourse.(2) The close relation between language and culture:The role of language within a culture and the influence of the culture onthe meaning of words and idioms are so pervasive that scarcely any textcan be adequately understood without careful consideration of its culturalbackground. (3) The necessity to focus attention on style and discourse:Certain mistakes in terminology and grammar can be forgiven, but a failure to reflect the spirit and dynamicof a source document is a “mortal sin”.(4) The relevance of insights coming from several different disciplines:Many people assume that the only prerequisites for translating are a bilingual dictionary, an exhaustive encyclopedia, and an ability to speak andwrite two languages. But ability to translate also depends on a number of very important insights which come directly or indirectly from severaldifferent disciplines, e.g. cultural anthropology, linguistics, psychology, communication theory, and literary analysis. It is the interdisciplinary approach to interlingual communication which contributes the major newinsights for effective translating and interpreting. Chapter 1. Paradoxes of Translating; Chapter 2. The Functions and Theories of Language; Chapter 3. The Structures of Language; Chapter 4. The Structures and Meaning of Lexemes; Chapter 5. The Structures and Meaning of Syntax; Chapter 6. The Structures and Meaning of Discourse; Chapter 7. Language and Culture; Chapter 8. Functional Equivalence; Chapter 9. Translation Procedures; Chapter 10. Theories of Translation;ContentsChapter 1. Paradoxes of Translating1. Most persons assume that literalness in translating means faithfulness to the text; In English, e.g. the repetition of a word usually implies emphasis, but not in Bahasa Indonesia, where repetition only signals plurality.2. Translating is valid but paraphrase is wrong; In English, as well as in most other European languages, one speaks of the “heart” as being the center of emotions, but in many languages in West Africa a person “loves with the liver” and in some of the indigenous language of Central America people talk about “loving with the stomach”. So here comes the conclusion: since languages do not differ in what they can say, but in how they say it, paraphrase is inevitable. What is important is the semantic legitimacy of the paraphrase.Chapter 1. Paradoxes of Translating3. Translator should first produce a more or less literal rendering of the source text and then proceed to improve it stylistically. Style is not the frosting on the cake, but an integral part of the process of interlingual communication. It must be built into the text right from the beginning. It is usually better to aim first at a stylistically satisfactory rendering of the source text and then review it carefully to “tighten it up” by analyzing and testing the correspondences. A few errors in the correspondences of lexical meaning are much more excusable than missing the spirit and aesthetic character of the source text.Chapter 1. Paradoxes of Translating4. Since translating is a skill which generally requires considerable practice, most people assume that it can be taught. To an extent, this is true. But it is also true that really exceptional translators are born, not made. Potential translators must have a high level of aptitude for the creative use of language, or they are not likely to be outstanding in their profession. “But the results of machine translating are usually in an unnatural form of language and sometimes just plain weird. Human translators will always be necessary for any text which is stylistically appealing and semantically complex.” The most difficult text to translate is one in which the speaker or writer has attempted to say nothing.Chapter 1. Paradoxes of Translating5. There is never a completely perfect or timeless translation. Both language and culture are always in the process of change. Furthermore, language is an open system with overlapping meanings and fuzzy boundariesthe bane of logicians but the delight of poets. The indeterminacy of language is part of the price that must be paid for creativity and for the new insights which come through symbolic reinterpretation of human experience.6. A person who knows two languages well can be a good translator. Knowing two languages is not enough. It is also essential to be acquainted with the respective culturesone of the important reasons for the title of this book language, Culture, and Translating. The paradoxes of translating are basicallyof language and culture.Chapter 7. Language and Culture.Since culture is defined succinctly as “the totality of beliefs and practices of a society,” nothing is of greaterstrategic importance than the language through whichits beliefs are expressed and transmitted and by which most interaction of its members takes place.The relation between languages and culture would not constitute suchserious difficulties for cross-cultural understanding if it were not for thenumerous misconceptions about language and its function within a society.1. Perhaps the most serious misconception is the idea that each languagemore or less controls the way people think. Sometimes expressed as “wethink the way we think because we talk the way we talk.” It is true that the particular structures of a language may reflect to a certain degree the waypeople think and they may be said to form “the ruts or paths for thinking,”but they do not determine what or how people must think. Languages aretoo open-ended and human imagination is too creative to be rigidly ruled by the regulations of syntax or of any other feature of language.Chapter 7. Language and Culture2. The idea that some languages are far more superior to otherlanguages and accordingly some cultures are far superior toother cultures. When people speak about languagesuperiority, they are usually talking about the literature which has been produced in such a language, or theyevaluate the lexical and syntactic in terms of the ways theses have beenexploited by creative writers. It is true that the oral and written literatures ofdifferent languages can differ considerably in quality, butAll languages have thePotential for outstanding aesthetic expression. It is simply one of the “accidents”Of history which determines the emergence of literary genius.Some people, however, believe that some languages are fundamentally ugly, whileothers are intrinsically beautiful. Arabic, for example, is often cited as an acoustically unpleasant language in view of its various guttural consonants, but a number of Arab poets have succeeded in producing exquisite poems with richsound patterns as acoustically sensuous and pleasing as occur in any language. Chapter 7. Language and Culture1. A language does reflect in certain aspects the culture of a society, but primarily in its optional features, i.e. in certain of its hierarchies of vocabulary and in the priorities given tovarious discourse patterns. It does not, however, reflectthe culture in its phonology or syntax, which are largely fixed and arbitrary.2. A language may have a proportionally high number of terms in particular domains is an important index to the focus of a culture. For example, most languages of Western Europe have an exceptionally high percentage of technicalterms, Sudanese have hundreds of terms for different kinds and features ofcattle, and Peruvian have scores of words for different kinds and forms of potatoes.3. Changes in culture often give rise to new types of discourse, e.g. technicalprose, financial reports, and news resumes. 4. The popularity of certain types of discourse may also reflectcultural concerns. For example, lyric poetry is far more popular in Latin America that in the US. And in general, epic poetryseems to have suffered a severe loss of popularity exceptin certain isolated regions.All of these interesting indices of relation between language and culture areprimarily matters of how language is used and are not matters of languagestructure. Since all languages are open systems, they have the potentiality forgrowth, change, and decline. In the hands of literary geniuses they can be themedium for brilliant aesthetic expression, and they can be seriously misused bypersons who have little or no sensitivity for clarity or elegance.Chapter 7. Language and CultureChapter 7. Language and CultureBilingualism and Biculturalism;Bilingual competence has almost always been regarded as anessential requirement for translators, but this does not always meanthat one must have an active competence in both the source language and target language. For truly successful translating,biculturalism is even more important than bilingualism, since words onlyhave meanings in terms of the cultures in which they function. Dictionaries and encyclopedias are an important source of strategiccultural information, but they can never take the place of personal involvement in a foreign society. Only by being in the foreign countriesCan one acquire the necessary sensitivity to the many special Meanings of words and phrases.Language and Subcultures;Chapter 8. Functional EquivalenceThe adequacy of translation has traditionally been judgedon the basis of the correspondences in lexicon and grammar between the source and target languages. Thecorrespondence has frequently been stated in terms of “equivalence.” It is best to speak of “functional equivalence” in terms of a range ofadequacy, since no translation is ever completely equivalent. This meansthat “equivalence” cannot be understood in its mathematical meaning ofidentity, but only in terms of proximity, i.e. on the basis of degrees ofcloseness to functional identity. A maximal, ideal definition could bestated as “the readers of a translated text should be able to understandand appreciate it in essentially the same manner as the original readersdid.” This maximal level of equivalence is rarely, if ever achieved, except for texts having little or no aesthetic value and involving only routineinformation.Chapter 8. Functional EquivalencePrinciples for Producing Functional Equivalence:1. If a close, formal translation is likely to result in a misunderstanding of the designative meaning,(a)certain changes must be introduced into the text of the translation or (b) the literal translation may be retained and a footnote explaining the likely misunderstanding must be added.In practically all circumstances the first alternative in this principleshould be followed, but there are certain circumstances and types ofdocuments, e.g. legal contracts, wills, political statements, andpurposely esoteric or cabalistic religious texts, in which a literalrendering with an explanatory note may be warranted.Chapter 8. Functional Equivalence2. If a close, formal translation makes no sense, i.e. is totallyobscure in designative meaning, certain changes may be introduced into the text unless the source text is purposely obscure, in which case the obscurity may be retained, and a footnote explaining the nature of the obscurity may be very useful and in most instances fully justified.3. If a close, formal translation is so semantically and syntacticallydifficult that the average person for whom the translation is being made is very likely to give up trying to understand it, certain changesare warranted, although it may be useful to indicate such changes in anintroduction or in footnotes.For example, the translation of a highly technical article for people whoare relatively unfamiliar with the contents, may require simplificationof vocabulary or built-in explanations for techinical terms.Chapter 8. Functional Equivalence4. If a close, formal translation is likely to result in seriousmisunderstanding of the associative meanings of the sourcetext or in a significant loss in a proper appreciation for the stylistic values of the source text, it is important to make suchadjustments as are necessary to reflect the associative values of thesource text.Too many translators assume that a correct reflection of designativemeaning is all that is required in translating. In fact, however, the associative meanings are generally far more important in convincingreaders of the relevance of the content.Chapter 8. Functional Equivalence5. The manner in which a translation is to be used has a significantinfluence upon the extent to which adjustments are tobe made.The translation of a drama to be read in the quiet of ones home isgenerally quite different from one which is designed to be acted onthe stage.6. The fact that a source text must be translated in such a way as tooccur with accompanying codes usually requires a number of adjustmentson all levels: phonology, lexicon, syntax, and discourse.The translation of songs almost always means considerable formal adjustments. .of operas involves even more serious difficulties, sincethe words must fit the music and also the action. Chapter 8. Functional EquivalenceThese principles for the production of functionally equivalenttranslations have a number of very practical implications:1. the greater the differences in the source and target cultures, thegreater the need for adjustments.2. the greater the differences between the source and target languages,the greater the need for adjustments.3. the more distinctive the style of the source text, the.4. the greater the differences in social and educational levels of the source and target audiences, the greater the number of adjustments.5. the more a translated text is dependent on an accompanying code,the greater the number and variety of adjustments. Chapter 8. Functional Equivalencewhat is needed are not elaborate formulas or theories,but translators with unusual sensitivity to the resources of language, the importance of culture, and the artof translating.Chapter 9. Translation ProceduresTranslation procedures involve far more than step-by-step procedures for producing a transaltion from a source text. there are a number of preliminary factors whichmust first be considered,e.g. the nature of the source text, the competence of a translator,the direction of the translation(e.g. from an acquired language toones own mother tongue or from a text in ones own mother tongueto an acquired language), the type of audience for which thetranslation is being prepared, the kind of publisher and editor, themarketing of the translation, and how it is likely to be used by readers. The actual translation process also involves a number ofquite distinct factors, e.g. the pressure of time, workby a single translator or a team, ideal VS. realisticprocedures, testing the results, multiple translationsof the same text, and the learning of translation techniques.The four basic processes in translating consist of (1) analysis of the source text, (2) transfer from source to target language, (3) restructuring in the target language, and (4) testing of the translatedtext with persons who represemt the intended audience.Chapter 9. Translation ProceduresThanks for your attention !结束结束