Renaissance , only reflections, beginning of 20th methodological approaches, until 30's more literary than scientific.

The Arabian nights. 40's and 50's Jean-Paul Viney, Jean Darbelnet comparative stylistics between French and English put forward a method for translation. equivalence-oriented translation as a procedure which 'replicates the same situation as in the original, whilst using completely different wording' proverbs, idioms, clichs, nominal or adjectival phrases and the onomatopoeia of animal sounds. Roman Jacobson the linguistic aspects introduced the notion of equivalence more forcefully 'translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes' Intralingual (within one language, i.e. rewording or paraphrase) Interlingual (between two languages) Intersemiotic (between sign systems) . He acknowledges that 'whenever there is deficiency, terminology may be qualified and amplified by loanwords or loan-translations, neologisms or semantic shifts, and finally, by circumlocutions', Compared between English and Russian. 60's 70's Eugne Nida dealt with his experience of translating the Holy book. Formal vs. dynamic equivalences, dynamic should be the ultimate goal of the translation. Catford: a more linguistic based approach As far as translation shifts are concerned, Catford defines them as 'departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL to the TL' (ibid.:73). Catford argues that there are two main types of translation shifts, namely level shifts, where the SL item at one linguistic level (e.g. grammar) has a TL equivalent at a different level (e.g. lexis), and category shifts which are divided into four types:
Structure-shifts, which involve a grammatical change between the .1 structure of the ST and that of the TT; Class-shifts, when a SL item is translated with a TL item which belongs .2 to a different grammatical class, i.e. a verb may be translated with a noun; Unit-shifts, which involve changes in rank; .3 Intra-system shifts, which occur when 'SL and TL possess systems which .4 approximately correspond formally as to their constitution, but when

translation involves selection of a non-corresponding term in the TL system' (ibid.:80). For instance, when the SL singular becomes a TL plural. 1.5 House and the elaboration of overt and covert translation House (1977),in favour of semantic and pragmatic equivalence, ST and TT should match one another in function. It is possible to characterize the function of a text by determining the situational dimensions of the ST.* if the ST and the TT differ substantially on situational features, then they are not functionally equivalent, and the translation is not of a high quality. overt and covert is meant the production of a text which is functionally equivalent to the ST. The ST 'is not specifically addressed to a TC audience' (ibid.:194). An academic article, for instance, is unlikely to exhibit any features specific to the SC, and the fact that it is a translation at all need not be made known to the readers. A political speech in the SC, on the other hand, is addressed to a particular cultural or national group which the speaker sets out to move to action or otherwise influence, whereas the TT merely informs outsiders what the speaker is saying to his or her constituency. Functional equivalence cannot be maintained, and it is therefore intended that the ST and the TT function differently. 1.6 Baker's approach to translation equivalence New adjectives have been assigned to the notion of equivalence (grammatical, textual, pragmatic equivalence, and several others) Baker (1992) seems to offer a more detailed list of conditions upon which the concept of equivalence can be defined. She explores the notion of equivalence at different levels, in relation to the translation process, putting together the linguistic and the communicative approach. She distinguishes between: Equivalence that can appear at word level and above word level .Baker acknowledges that, in a bottom-up approach to translation, equivalence at word level is the first element to be taken into consideration by the translator. In fact, when the translator starts analyzing the ST s/he looks at the words as single units in order to find a direct 'equivalent' term in the TL. Baker gives a definition of the term word since it should be remembered that a single word can sometimes be assigned different meanings in different languages and might be regarded as being a more complex unit or morpheme. This means that the translator should pay attention to a number of factors when considering a single word, such as number, gender and tense (ibid.:11-12). Grammatical equivalence, when referring to the diversity of grammatical categories across languages. She notes that grammatical rules may vary across languages and this may pose some problems in terms of finding a direct correspondence in the TL. In fact, she claims that different grammatical structures in the SL and TL may cause remarkable changes in the way the information or message is carried across. These changes may induce the translator either to add or to omit information in the TT

because of the lack of particular grammatical devices in the TL itself. Amongst these grammatical devices which might cause problems in translation Baker focuses on number, tense and aspects, voice, person and gender. Textual equivalence, when referring to the equivalence between a SL text and a TL text in terms of information and cohesion. Texture is a very important feature in translation since it provides useful guidelines for the comprehension and analysis of the ST which can help the translator in his or her attempt to produce a cohesive and coherent text for the TC audience in a specific context. It is up to the translator to decide whether or not to maintain the cohesive ties as well as the coherence of the SL text. His or her decision will be guided by three main factors, that is, the target audience, the purpose of the translation and the text type. Pragmatic equivalence, when referring to implicatures and strategies of avoidance during the translation process. Implicature is not about what is explicitly said but what is implied. Therefore, the translator needs to work out implied meanings in translation in order to get the ST message across. The role of the translator is to recreate the author's intention in another culture in such a way that enables the TC reader to understand it clearly.

* It should be noted that House's model of situational dimension is adapted from Crystal and Davy's model elaborated in 1969. House gives an extensive explanation of the reasons which motivated her to change, and sometimes omit, some of the information given by Crystal and Davy. Further details can be found in House (1977:38-41), or in D. Crystal and D. Davy, Investigating English Style (London: Longman, 1969).

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES Baker, Mona (1992) In Other Words: a Coursebook on Translation, London: Routledge. Catford, John C. (1965) A Linguistic Theory of Translation: an Essay on Applied Linguistics, London: Oxford University Press. Fawcett, Peter (1997) Translation and Language: Linguistic Theories Explained, Manchester: St Jerome Publishing House, Juliane (1977) A Model for Translation Quality Assessment, Tbingen: Gunter Narr. Kenny, Dorothy (1998) 'Equivalence', in the Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker, London and New York: Routledge, 77-80. Jakobson, Roman (1959) 'On Linguistic Aspects of Translation', in R. A. Brower (ed.) On Translation, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 232-39.

'

p 

&

&

k X

8 u

$ 

&

&

f Y

d X

"

k w

g 

&

&

6 X  u

&

c # F R t i c b # ' H R R u k # w H $  X # y w k w U u

) W

R X 

6 X 

$ 

'  W

k w

  

R X 

6 X 

B w 

$ t

&

6 ~ X

&

' 

a t

$ 

&

| w

&

&

&

R X 

4 s

$ t

a 

) 

x 

)  w

$ u X

p v

&

&

&

) X

# w

e c d k j i & R  h p 6 & & g e  T  W   6 a s c X T a H p  k H 6 6 F )

&

p t X

t 

t 

&

8 

g 

$  X

R 

R X 

X 

w t v X 

u t s X 

g 

6 a

p 

a 

&

Y X W V

8 

g 

$  X

&

'

&

"

'

&

"

  

Nida, Eugene A. and C.R.Taber (1969 / 1982) The Theory and Practice of Translation, Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Vinay, J.P. and J. Darbelnet (1995) Comparative Stylistics of French and English: a Methodology for Translation, translated by J. C. Sager and M. J. Hamel, Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1.6 Baker's approach to translation equivalence

Nida, Eugene A. (1964) Towards a Science of Translating, Leiden: E. J. Brill.

262

1981

2
6 I 3 H

339
y t  c b

3338

&

&

X 

X 

w t

y t 

6 

H 

 

p 

&

'

R 

 6 s f k w H # 8 X W a p & w T H f k p j f # t
#

&

"

X s

&

8 X t 

8 X 

T t w

&

x 

&

h 

y X

&

w X


H


$ t

h X

t 

&

&

p  X 

X 

h X 

6 X 

F s v

x 

h  

k a

X 

$ 

&

p 

&

p  X 

p t X

$ 

&

p t

&

p X

R X

$ 

y X

R 

a 

&

R X

&

$ u X s

p  X 

x 

&

&

p 

X 

4 s

$ t

a 

y W

T t w

k X

h X

a  6 6 u d v t X W X & B R & f

y X

'

y W

R 

'

&

b w 

8 

v t X 

X 

f t X W

t 

k 

&

c b  

'

6 X 

p w

p 

&

w t v

f 


t   

&

p v

6 t

p 

r x

x 

a  w W

R  X

k w

# w

&

$ t

a 

'

' X

&

$ t

a 

&

6 t

&

&

4 s

$ t

a 

w 

&

R  X

f w 

p w 

&

X 

$  X

&

g 

8 

H X

' v

R X 

# 

&

&

'

$ s

$ s

'

) X

6 X

T w

&

$ 

' 

338

6 X 

U w

$ 

R 

& X

d X

k X

$ t

a 

&

'

$ 

6 

& a

R X

$ 

# u

&

'

8 u

k w

109

108

R w

$ t

a 

R X 

6 X 

$ 

$ 

&

6 X 

v t X 

p 

&

&

k w

6
x ' % ) $ t &  3  # %

269
n )  X  

6 5 4 3

p  c '  X H

' v

) X

k  X w

d 

$ w

&

'

&

&

$ 

w X 

&

v t 

e X 

&

'

( u

d  X

& w

&

$ 

&

'

&

&

p s

R t

8 

R X 

p v 

$ 

' v X

w X

6 w

h


) w X

X 

f w

X W

$ 

&

' 

'

'

' 

'

' 

'

' 

'

&

'

4 X t 

k w 

'

R v

6 X

&

6 u

 t 

u W

# 

# 

y 

"

&

H


T 

'

R t

k X

6 X

&

&

&

s X

$ 

y W

R  v

&

$ w X

q X 

&

& X

x 

p X

6 X

h 

&

w X

X 

p 

a w

t 

 X

&

&

$ W

$  X

p u

j 

k t

&

$ 

&

$ 

&

& X

k w

y 

&

&

$ 

k X

$ 

6 w

&

" t  w

k X

k t

&

&

# t

x 

k t

'  X

v t X X

& s

'

&

$ 

&

h X  w

&

' 

'

y 

&

j t

y  v

6 u

&

g 

4 

&

k X

y X

j X 

k X

&

& X 

R X

k X

6 w X

& w

a w

 a

&

 w X

X 

&

T s X v 

v t X 

"

X s

&

y v

&

# X t

&

k s

t w

6 

1998

'

y 

y X

j X 

X 

X 

H 

' X 

'

&

&

' X 

k X

h w

r X

X w

&

) 

531

'

&

&

168

&

X 

' W

e 

p t

&

p w

&

10

339

R t

11
2 & q   ) 6 T c

124
! 9 &  2 3 2 w (

1988

&

w X


11 10 9 8 7

( w

$ 

H t

b $  h  h & S x X 

p v d W

'

' 

d X

$ 

&

$ w

&

y t W

y W

&

&

$ 

8 W

X 

 

# u

k X

&

  

y 

a 

 X 

6 X

w X

&

&

$ 

R v

&

$  X

y W

k w

' X

$ u X

h 

p X

$ t

&

) 

&

6 

"

$ t

$ t

y 

6 w

&

s X

$ t

$ t

&

s X

$ t

k X

R 

&

t 

&

t 

&

y 

4 W

&

&

t 

& X 

k 

a  

p 

8  W

p X 

p  w

&

p X

 X 

g 

T X 

$ u

t 

&

t 

"

 d W 4 & # r y  v


&

&

$ 

$ w

R X

y 

y X

R X 

h  X 

 

&

x 

&

&

p X  

R X

X 

R 

) 

X 

$ 

w  X 

y t X 

h  X 

x 

p u X


' 

&

S R Q %

&

R X

) 

 

$ 

w  X 

X 

) 

x 

&

R 

p v

f u

&

R X

'

y 

X X

"

X 

&

$ 

$ X

) 

x 

$ X

'

&

&

p t

"

k 

y 

& X

$ 

&

h 

$ 

&

'  X

p u

) 

x 

&

F v

&

&

&

'

&

y 

&

&

& X 

$ 

& 

247

232

422

380

287

15

&

a 

&

t 

&

t 

h X  V X

6 

$ 

y 

p 

$  X

"

'

r 

$ X  X 

v 

h X 

a s t 

e (


a  

&

R


&

y  v


&

R t

&

a w

p v

&

&

g 

k w

p X 

&

R  X

&

4 B ) H t f b a t d q T w Q n a & ) 

16
 ) e  D X  3 H p X  9


335


421

387

16 15

) t

w X w X 

8  t

&

6 

p 

w t

&

h X  w

p v

w X


R  X

p X

t 

p 

H 

y 

$ u

u 

 W

$ u

&

y 

&

y t

$ w

U a s ) # 4 ( d n ) # R X Q


h X 

&

a s

&

6 X

6 X

&

k 

&

X 

&

k w

& 

6 

&

X 

y 

y t W

x 

k 6 X h X 

'

  

y 

p v

Q w

&

X 

R 

$ 

y X

&

$ 

y  v

y 

a X

$ 

p v

k 

y 

R 

f s

6 a

p v

y 

$ X 

g 

p v

H ~

$ 

&

T V

u w

y X

&

R t w

b s

p v

'

H 

8 v

p v w X 

$ X 

 X

6 

h 

y 

h X

a v

&

$  X

s X v

p v

&

&

p 

y 

R 

w X

&

&

a s

v t 

e 

R 

H t 

&

g 

$ t

t 

&

p 

R 

a s

 

6 

&

'

X t 

&

p 

&

$ 

&

x 

&

t X

&

&

X 

x 

$ t

v t 

6 

Q w

&

y X

&

'

p 

17

c b s X


$ t

p t

&

&

) t

'

&

&

w X

137

136

$ 

&

&

"

r t 

$ 

a 

"

r t 

&

H w

k X

 X

&

&

R v

'

20

429

376

319

21

k X

H

R t

$ s

u X  

&

t 

h X 

&

t 

&

) X 

&

$ 

 

&

254

1986

X 

23

162

160

24


&

h X 

r 

$ 

&

1951

643

728

22

661

19

20 1981

24 23 22 21 17

& 

"

y 

'

&

'

&

y t t

&

6 u

&

6 

' W

$ 

k w

s X v

'

t s 

y 

y 

' 

( a

v t 

e 

H $ ) 4

&

&

h  X 

$ 

&

v W

d X

h X

) s

p  X 

x 

&

&

p 

X 

4 s

$ t

a 

$ t

a 

v t X W

&

y X

'

y W

8 

v t X 

c b  

'

6 X 

p w

p 

f 


t   

&

p v

6 t

p 

x 

&

&

R X 

4 s

$ t

a 

y t 

) 

x 

)  w

8 

g 

k 

H t

X 

y X

&

&

p v

y X 

4 

g 

) w

&

g 

f 

&

y X

&

&

p v

42

41

1970

25

$  X

R 

8 

g 

$  X

R 

R X 

X 

w t v X 

B w

&

X 

h  X 

&

) 

x 

e w

k 

6 X 

&

& X 

h 

&

) 

$ 

a X

x 

e w

k 

6 X 

X 

R X

d X 

y  a

e w

k 

p v

w X

$ 

p s

&

# w

6 

$ 

$ 

h X 

'

&

4
d p D X & k q 2  H

&

&

R 

'

&

b w 

6 X 

X 

f t X W

6 

v t X 

w t v

6 X 

U w

 

r x

$ 

R 

& X

p 

 a  w W

d X

$ 

k w

&

&

X 

X 

w t

y t 

u t s X 

g 

6 a

p 

a 

&

Y X W V

X 

R X

d X 

x 

&

e w

k 

6 X 

e 

6 X 

e 

$ 

y W

$ 

$ t

&

25

&

s X

h X 

&

$ W

$  X

p u

'

&

&

 

# u

" t  w

j 

k t

&

$ 

&

$ 

&

& X

v t X X

k w

y 

&

&

$ 

k X

$ 

6 w

&

k X

k t

&

&

# t

x 

k t

'  X

&

&

'

&

$ 

&

h X  w

&

' 

'

y 

&

  

j t

y  v

6 u

&

k X

g 

4 

&

k X

h w

' t

H w

"

X s

h  

k a

X 

$ 

&

p 

&

p  X 

h  X 

x 

'

H s v

&

6 a

k w

' X

6 X 

$ u X s

$ 

$ 

&

$ 

&

p t

&

p X

R X

R w

4 s

$ t

a 

R v

&

x 

&

$ 

y X

R 

a 

7
H   


r X

a 

k X

6 w X

H 

' X 

'

&

&

' X 

&

a w

 a

&

 w X

X 

&

h  X 

$ 

( u

&

B x

 t X  u 

6 X 

X 

T u u 

X 

p X

&

$ 

r 

) 

x 

&

T v 

v t X 

p 

R W

&

&

6 X 

&

y v

&

# X t

&

k s

t w

6 

X w

&

) 

 6 s f k w H # 8 X W a p & w T H f k p j f # t
#

&

"

X s

&

8 X t 

8 X 

T t w

&

x 

&

h 

p  X 

X 

h X 

6 X 

)  X  

p 

'  X

'

&

p s

$ t

a 

R X 

R X

&

R a

) W

u 

w 

&

R X

R X  

'

&

&

( a

j 

&

&

&

&

&

S % w R


R t

8 

S x X  R R X  p v  p 4 #  s $  h ' v X y w X c 6 w & q w ( $  h H t

h


) w X

X 

f w

X W

$ 

&

H t

w t 

u 

' 

'

&

' 

'

R v

' 

d X

'

' 

'

$ 

'

&

'

4 X t 

'

R t

&

6 X

&

6 u

$ w

&

y t W

# 

y 

"

x 

k X

6 X

&

&

&

u 

k X

$ 

v t X 

&

& X 

$ 

&

&

X 

' W

e 

p t

s X

$ 

y W

R  v

&

$ w X

q X 

&

& X

j 

j  

&

h  x X

&

w X

X 

&

& t

x 

p X

6 X

h 

p 

x 

&

&

&

p w

&

6   

k X

) 

x 

&

x 

p 

k X

&

p w

&

&

y W

" t 

$ 

11
  E ) 6   ) 6  a p ( '  k w   t  & % w 4 & 1

$ 

&

&

' 

&

10

R t

'

'

u W

# 

H


T 

h  X 

y W

&

$ 

8 W

X 

"

y X

k X

} X 

$ s

t X

) 

x 

p X

y w

&

v W

&

&

6   

w t

p t

j X

p w

&

& X  

$ 

) t

&

&

"

k 

y 

& X

$ 

&

h 

$ 

&

'  X

$ 

p u

) 

x 

&

F v

&

&

&

'

y 

X X

"

y X

B v

&

k X

) 

x 

$ 

R X u

( v

p 

X 

&

$ 

$ X

) 

x 

$ X

'

&

&

#  w

&

$ 

'

' 

) t

t 

&

& X

6 X

y 

h X 

) w

&

h  X 

x 

e w

k 

6 X 

X 

$ 

w  X 

e w

k 

6 X 

X 

$ w t

&

6 X 

X 

y w

$ 

w  X 

e w

k 

& X 

&

6 

& X 

) 

&

F ~

$ 

R w

&

 w

' t

' t

# w X

a X

d 

h 

k a

p u

&

y X 

& X 

&

6 

& X 

$ 

F ~

$ 

R w

& 

R X

 

6 a

&

&

6 

& X 

&

F ~

&

& X

6 a

B v X

&

d 

h 

$ 

y u

p u

&

y X 

& X 

R v X 

& v

6 X 

p u

&

y X 

& X 

$ 

&

B w

R t

k w

X  

h  X 

e w

k X 

d t

'

&

x 

h  X 

'

H ~

&

& X

x 

&

'

) 

x 

$ w

p X

y t X

p X

&

'

$ 

&

&

& X

$ X

h  X 

x 

w  X 

& 

' 

12
X i

&

 w

$ 

d  X

$ 

c x

&

$ 

R X

X 

R 

) 

X 

$ 

w  X 

y t X 

h  X 

x 

p u X


' 

w X w X 

p 

r 

$ X  X 

v 

h X 

a s t 

8  t

y  v


&

R t

&

p v

&

&

&

6 

&

R  X

&

p 

&

' 

&

6


$ 

$ 

X 

X 

y t X 

'

b


&

8 X

h  X 

X 

X 

w Q n w B

H t

R X

) 

 

$ 

w  X 

X 

) 

x 

&

R 

p v

f u

&

R X

'

X H  t  p k r Q $ k p & y j p X t
#

6 

v t X

6 a & R X w h $  u X ( u )  a X d X d u y n p H R 

6 

&

R X 

X X 

y 

&

&

( x X

p 

v W

 

&

'

&

 s

) 

x 

&

&

&

' s

$ w

'

'

u t

8 

v t X 

13

R  X

&

' s

k X

H 

&

t X

$ t

g 

$ 

247

232

14

422

380

15
 y  # $ h  6 f # e

6 

$ 

y 

$  X

"

'

(


a  

&

R


&

a w

g 

k w

p X 

6 X 

X 

$ w 

'

6 X 

b a t d q T w Q n a & ) 

t X v

k X

u X

T a s


p w  W

$  X

y t

H w t

T t w

k w

d X 

$ 

&

$ X

&

k w

p t  X 

$ 

w  X 

6 

&

$ 

'

Q 

a 

&

q


$ 

&

x 

$ 

a s

$ 

"

r t 

$ 

a 

"

r t 

&

H w

k X

 X

&

&

R v

'

&

$ 

R v

' X

$ u X

h 

$ t

$ t

y 

6 w

&

k X

R 

&

&

8 

k w

k t

&

4 

8 

p 

T t w

6  

p  v

&

& 

p t

p 

) t

'

$ 

& 

p 

'

p 

6 

W t

&

'

&

k 

$ 

y  v

y 

4 W

t 

& X 

k 

a  

p 

8  W

p X 

p  w

&

p X

 X 

g 

T X 

$ u

t 

&

t 

"

 d W 4 & # r y  v


&

&

$ 

$ w

R X

y 

y X

R X 

h  X 

 

&

x 

&

&

p X  

16

17

4  c b s X


$ t

p t

&

&

&

) t

'

&

&

w X

 X 

6 X

w X

&

&

$  X

y W

k w

p X

$ t

&

) 

&

6 

"

s X

$ t

$ t

&

s X

$ t

&

p t 

d t

$ t

 X

Q a

w X

$ 

&

X 

&

' 

' X

p 

6  

6 

6 X

R X

&

'

6 X

&

p 

&

&

 

X 

p X 

421

387

) t

&

p 

&

$ 

&

x 

&

t X

&

&

x 

y X

R X 

p v

&

a  

&

 X 

"

&

a t

v W

&

U   t

p 

&

s t

&

  X  

y X 

 X 

k w

&

366

350

18

376


&

' 

' 

p u

&

y t

# s

'

X t 

$ 

&

y W

6 

&

&

d 

h 

t v

a s

$ X 

p u

$ 

&

R 

y X

& 

6 a w

' 

p u

#  

p t

$ 

R 

6 

y X 

'

&

R  X

&

& X 

$ 

$ 

&

'

$  X 

$ 

&

'

'

p t

t X

 X 

t w 

y X

j 

6 X 

'

'  u

&

S u

h 

&

F 

&

&

&

p 

'

4 X

$  X

"

c t t

&

w t X

j a

4 W

 w

4 W

k 

' 

'

k 

h ~

  

&

p t

v W

T x 

&

H


 a

p v

$ 

&

"

$ 

&

$  X

6 X

&

"

k X

&

s w

4 s

g 

&

&

"

  W

$ 

&

h 

a 

&

'

4 t

&

&

&  

 

 

 t  T  & % w H


e 

k X

6 w X 

6 X

$ t

&

&

$ x

 W

6 

"

a s

$ X

&

B u d e a y p 6 g  f

$ 

# Y

6 s

f t 

&

a s

&

6 X

6 X

&

k 

y 

'

&

'

&

&

X 

&

k w

& 

6 

y t t

X 

y 

y t W

x 

&

6 u

&

'

  

y 

p v

$ 

&

6 

&

R X

a X

s 

6 a

p v

y 

H ~

$ 

&

T V

$ X 

t s 

'

h 

y 

&

y 

 X

' 

h X

& w

&

6 X

"

X w 

R X

&

p 

&

U w

$ 

a s

$ X 

p X 

$  X

u X  

X 

( a

H X

R 

$ 

g 

$ t

t 

&

p 

R 

a s

 

6 

&

20

21

22

429

23

728
P b }  P ) d q D  9 h H 4

643

19

661

r 

&

6 X

h 

d t

) 

x 

h X 

y 

T 

u w t 

p u

j 

$ 

$ 

&

p X  

$ 

a  

&

'

' W

$ 

R 

$ 

y X

k w

s X v

&

$ 

y  v

y 

u w

'

$ 

p v

k 

y 

R 

$ a y j H 

$ X 

g 

p v

8 v

p v w X 

6 

a v

&

$  X

s X v

p v

$ W

y 

X 

y 

p v

$ 

&

k X

p v

y 

&

&

f


$ 

h X 


p v

$ 

&

R 

k X

H

R t

$ s

 

&

&

S R Q % w & U k q U u & # H & 4 6 p & t

& X 

k X

'

&

p 

& X 

&

4 ) h ) h   w X f a d w #

a w

&

p 

&

p 

y 

&

'

&

& X 

w 

y 

$ 

&

y X

&

&

p w

' 

'

&

6 v

'

p 

&

$ 

$ X 

'

$ 

&

$ 

6 X

F u

$  X

a 

&

d 

$  X

& a

&

'

W v  W

&

w F k X H '  H p ( d X H q v 4 d p w ( y X & $ Q

p v

&

R X

$ 

&

h  X 

x 

$ 

'

H 

&

g 

f t

R 

k X

' 

&

s X

a w

u 

$ 

&

&

'

y X

&

&

p 

y X 

4 

g 

) w

&

&

y X

&

&

y 

$ u

&

y 

&

y t

$ w

U a s ) # 4 ( d n ) # R X Q


h X 

24

906

u 

26

&

&

H t X

8 

g 

$  X

R 

4 

&

w X

6 v 

&

t 

&

&

k 

k 

'

$ 

g 

X 

k X

'

p  X 

& w

&

w X

&

&

h 

&

$ 

g 

f 

&

# w

6 

$ 

p v

$ 

h X 

'

&

s X

 W H

$ u

&

& 

h X 

r 

"

27

289
$ s 9 2 E 6 f  H %


746

490

4 X

X 

$ 

25

&

h X 

j 

( X

T 

a v

b w X X

&

w X X

R  t X

y t t

$ 

a  

y X

&

s X

&

a w

&

6 v

y 

p 

p u

' X 

h X 

x X

&

&

&

6 

&

&

&

"

"

$ t

'

$ 

&

X 

R v

r X

&

s w

'

h w

p v

&

&

$ 

& X 

H

a 

& X 

&

4 t

'

R 

&

'

c X

k 

& X 

& X 

6 t 

6 X 

29

&

$ 

k X w

&

'

R t t

H x

'

&

'

'

$ 

&

r X

f s

'

f 

&

k 

'

'

'

k  X

k 

$ 

v  W

c 

'

k 

R 

H w

) 

$ x

&

$  X

$ 

c u

y 

R t W

767
U a p y &  # ' & U 6 P #

30

p 

&

'

y 

&

) 

y 

k X

p X

$  X

k w

&

&

y 

$  X

' t 

'

) 

k w

&

&

'

'

&

$ 

'

t v

' 

' 

&

'

&

f s

$ 

k 

$  X

a 

6 v

'

'

6  

6 t 

28

y 

6 u

&

& X 

&

X 

&

) a

'

&

y t t

'  X

&

'

R X 

X 

X 

6 s

k X

a 

a w

k t

# w

p 

$ 

 

&

w  X 

k X

f a

&

'

&

' 

' 

R W

&

&

6 X 

X 

k 

' 

k w

y 

p u

k X

t X X

) W

a s

 

&

'

# w 

y 

p t 

r X

p 

k w

p w X 

y 

&

k X

k w

$  X

a 

k X

u X

' t

&

w  X 

$ u X

'

H t R k X w & U $  # # ) e $  & % w  X  v t X X  p v k  y  t X X X 4 X 

p 

&

' 

X 

&

' t

&

k 

&

31

&

a  

4 t

# 

g 

j 

R X

#


p 

h X 

$ 

&

'

$ 

$ 

&

4 

p  

&

p w

&

' 

d t

&

32

33
Q


$ X

$ 

$  X

&

p 

&

$ 

&

a  

k 

d X

&

k X

b W

y 

&

d X

h X

'

6 v

k w

$ s

a X

p 

# 

&

w  X  

&

) W

$ 

&

&

y  X

&

&

$ 

&

h X

6 w

&

&

d s

k Y 

f 

&

& X 

&

' 

R t

$  X

p X

k X

g 

k v

&

4 t

$ 

&

k X

g 

'

y a

&

d t

&

&

g 

&

) 

x 

Q X

p X 

s 

&

&

$ t

R X

&

R X 

& X 

$ s

k X

&

p t

f a

u 

p 

r 

&

w  X 

X 

&

$ 

'

'

( a

r 

6 X 

$ s

# t

$ s

$  X

&

) 

'

'

$ 

'

( a

&

&

) 

x 

& 

6 X 

X 

&

j 

$ 

$ X

p u

&

& X

y  X 

' X 

$ 

h X

u w t  a h H q 6 w w e $ s  q

y W

x 

'

k w

k 

$ 

& X 

&

R 

6 X 

$ 

Q X

p X 

) 

x 

r 

&

R v

 & % w  X   y X  T  n

y t 

q X  X

p 

h 

g 

$  w

& 

X 

k w 

&

&

&

X 

'

6 u

&

p 

k w

X  w

k X

 

&

w  X 

$ 

p 

&

$ 

34

6  

35
2 6 X  4 E b b 6 E  6 X l H q  2 T 2 Q U

 

r 

$ 

s v

p s

&

6 w

&

&

) 

x 

6 X 

p 

$ s

a X

p  x X

6 X 

X 

r 

 X

&

 t

&

y X 

6 t

&

6 X 

6 X

&

& 

a 

8 

r X

y W

T t w

k X

h X

R  X

k w

# w

&

$ t

a 

'

' X

&

$ t

a 

&

6 t

&

&

4 s

$ t

a 

w 

&

R  X

f w 

p w 

&

X 

$  X

&

g 

8 

H X

' v

R X 

# 

&

&

'

$ s

$ s

'

) X

6 X

T w

&

$ 

' 

'

p 

&

&

k X

&

&

f Y

d X

"

k w

g 

c # F R t i c b # ' H R R u k # w H $  X # y w k w U u

) W

R X 

  

R X 

6 X 

B w 

$ t

&

' 

a t

$ u X

p v

&

&

&

e c d k j i & R  h p 6 & & g e  T  W   6 a s c X T a H p  k H 6 6 F )

&

p t X

t 

t 

&

262

1981

338

339

3338

4 3 2 1

t 

k 

&

k X

$ t

a 

&

'

$ 

6 

& a

R X

&

$ 

# u

&

&

'

k w

' v

8 u

k w

) X

8 u

$ 

&

&

6 X  u

&

6 X 

$ 

'  W

k w

6 ~ X

&

$ 

&

| w

&

) X

# w

6 

H 

 

p 

&

'

&

X X  w

k X  a

j 

&

&

v 

"

&

8 X 

$ X  X 

'

&

k X 

u 

&

$ 

f t

X X  w

k X 

j 

&

s X

R X

$ X 

s X 

d t

6 X

' t

f


&

&

'

&

&

p s

p 

a w

y X

j X 

k X

&

& X 

R X

y X

&

w X


H


p t X

109

108

269

1998

'

y 

y X

j X 

$ t

h X

t 

531

168

t 

339

 X

&

124

1988

12
9 #

y 

&

&

& X 

$ 

& 

k  X w

d 

$ w

&

'

&

&

$ 

w X 

&

v t 

e X 

&

'

( u

d  X

& w

&

$ 

&

&

w X


11 10 9 8 7 6 5

X 

X 

y 

&

h X

t 

v t 

6 

6 v

&

&

&

&

'

&

&

d X

d X X 

h X 

h 

&

'

k X

x 

&

g 

$  X

R 

$ 

&

8 W

'

X t 

d W

$ 

e w

$  X

y 

6 X 

Q X

p X 

c w

6 X 

X 

'

k X

f u

) 

x 

a 

k 

' 

t w

w X

&

$ 

&

v  X 

X 

x 

$ t

v t 

6 

Q w

&

y X

&

'

p 

t 

&

t 

&

&

421

287

&

a 

&

t 

&

t 

$ 

R 

6 X 

& X 

 

335

137

136

$ 

&

&

h X  V X

164

162

1985

4
) e P m k f E c b E

1963

# n d

w X


H


$ t

h 

"

$ 

'

R 

# p u T $  d n T # p t R & U 8  h

19 18 17 16 15 14 13

R t

R v

6 X 

'

6 a w

) 

x 

R X 

&

&

p v

y 

y X

j X 

k X

8 X

'

&

$ 

&

X 

y X

&

&

p v

h X  w

p v

w X


Q w

&

X 

y X

&

R 

w X

&

&

a s

v t 

t 

319

&

t 

h X 

&

t 

&

) X 

&

254

1986

162

160

R t w

b s

p v

e 

v t 

19

1951

42

41

1970

39

41

p v

66

25

41

39

1981

29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20

y X 

X 

y X

j X 

&

w X

$ 

p s

$ 

$ t

&

R  X

p X

t 

p 

H 

e 

$ 

6  

http://www.metransparent.com/texts/george_tarabichi_who_killed

'

B w 

6 X 

$ 

t 

p s

p w

n X

j 

a 

&

 

B w 

R X 

6 X 

a w

&

k 

r t u

&

'

&

y 

&

p 

204

212

570

531

530

574

532

&

"

X 

p 

.
T X p f x R P a q & B

tm _translation_in_islam.h

48

35 34 33 32 31 30

&

) w

H


&

6 X

) w

u 

 

'

x X

&

'

&

'

&

&

&

&

U w

g v

6 v

4 W

'

r X  

&

$ 

$ 

R w

&

&

&

g 

6 

.
 

&

a t

$ 

&

$  X

p w

X X

4 X 

a w

R v

H

P

) X

s w

$ 

y  X

p t

$ 

'

&

P

'

&

k X

&

'

k X

'

&

'

d X

k X

k w

6 

T w X X

p t X

F a

p v

'

'

'

h 

t v

&

&

&

&

&

4 Y

'

&

X 

&

k t

&

t v

h 

'

 w X

&

% w 

&

) X

Y W

$ 

B

$ 

4 t

&

&

k X

&

H

&

h X

 

g 

P

&

'

&

d 

6  

q

 

$  X

p w

&

&

k X

&

" 

&

6 X

x 

# X

'

(g

$ 

P

"

&

$  X

g 

$ 

) X

&

k X

'

d 

6 

$ 

'

r X

$  X

$ 

k 

p t 

&

$ 

  

p w

&

&

B

&

&

&

p 

p w  W

k 

j X

B

% Y

&

B

&

$ 

k w

B

&

'

&

&

'

%

a w

h 

p t

X 

k X

p 

X 

&

&

&

&

p w Y

&

$ 

g Y

&

w Y

&

$ 

g Y

&

h 

P

$  X

g Y

&

$  X

g 

$ 

j X

v t

&

&

&

g 

&

p t

'

&

R 

p X

&

d X

&

p t

(g w Y

&

'

'

'

k 

$ 

A first decision to be made might be to choose the method of translation. This issue has always been a debate among translators and translation theorists (Hatim and Mason, 1991). As early as 1813, Schleiermacher has discussed this issue, and came out with what he calls two "authentic" methods of translating:

As already explained, a large number of translation problems result from the incompatibility between the source and the target communities. The translator is thus bound to constantly take decisions on how to deal with each problem, and what to choose from the multitude of approaches and alternatives.

B Y

B Y

p w

a w

$ 

" 

&

'

&

H w w

"

6 X 

H

"

p v

&

a 

&

6 

&

6 

X 

&

&

k  X

d X

'

 

P

a w

'

$ 

a w

&

&

t 

) X

p t

&

X 

$ 

6 u

X 

$ 

R w v

R w

$ 

'

p v

$ 

'

f w

$ 

y 

h X X

a X s 

'  X

p v

( v

a w

&

a t

&

&

p X 

&

R t

(p. 49) "Ou bien le traducteur laisse l'crivain le plus tranquille possible et fait que le lecteur aille sa rencontre, ou bien il laisse le lecteur le plus tranquille possible et fait que l'crivain aille sa rencontre."

1.3.2. Translation as Decision Making

http://www.tech4c.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24227 .


t v

6 t

$ 

(see translation 13, Appendix B) In the second choice, he explains, the translator does as if the writer originally produced the text in the target language. This method neglects the close relationship between the writer's original culture and original language. Whereas in the first choice, which he considers the only "correct", the translator does as if the target reader reads the source language. By so doing, the source culture is conserved and the "foreign" character of the text is preserved. To Schleiermacher (1813), a text's foreign character is very important to preserve. It makes up the value of the text and guarantees a better communication and understanding between cultures. Furthermore, it develops the peoples' open-mindedness and transmits knowledge and authentic thought (Schleiermacher, 1813). This is also defended by Mounin (1962) in his article "Le traducteur entre les mots et les choses" in the following words: "Tout le travail du Traducteur son point le plus lev de difficult, c'est justement d'essayer de donner ses lecteurs une ide des choses inaccessibles dont parle un texte en langue trangre, qui se rfre une culture souvent trangre, soit en partie, soit en totalit." ( p.50) (see translation 14, Appendix B) Although Schleiermacher (1813) does not set practical principles to his theory's application, it seems as an earlier framework of a more recent theory. It is the distinction made by Nida (1964) between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. The former's purpose is to be as faithful as possible to the source text's both form and content. It thus provides the target reader with some degree of insight into the lexical and structural form of the source text. And most importantly, it lets the target reader, as Nida (1964) puts it, "understand as much as he can of the customs, manner of thought, and means of expression" of the source culture (p. 129). Dynamic equivalence, on the other hand, seeks an equivalent effect on the target reader. It follows that features of the source culture be of secondary importance in favour of the fulfilment of the ST's function, and the production of an equivalent effect. A similar problem emerges when translating old texts. Indeed, it entails one choice out of two. The first is keeping old concepts as they are with explanatory footnotes, for instance. The second is rendering them in a modern way accessible to the modern reader. The first orientation is textcentered, the second, reader-centered (Hatim and Mason, 1991, p. 16). To these orientations may be added the author-centered one, which takes into consideration the author's biography and personality in text interpretation (ibid.). Another question is "Do I have to bother the target reader with all these strange things that he may not understand nor be interested in?" (James, 2002, 2) As Kate James (2002) formulates it, when discussing the cultural issue: "The translator [...] has to decide on the importance given to certain cultural aspects to what extent it is necessary or desirable to translate them into the TL." ( 2) It is difficult to say who has the right to decide on this question? This issue, as well, is related to the controversy opposing text-centered to reader-centered orientations, or formal to dynamic approaches.

Although a decision within a translation act belongs always to the translator, it should, in fact, be the result of a thorough study of all the relevant factors. As expressed by Hatim and Mason (1991): "In fact, the beginning of a solution to the problem will depend, to borrow a well-known sociolinguistic formula, on: who is translating what, for whom, when, where, why and in what circumstances?" (p.6) The problem lies in the possible conflict between these factors. However, translator's orientation. Hatim and Mason (1991) suggest an interesting conclusion. "Given that, in any case, translating involves a conflict of interests, it is all a question of where one's priorities lie." (p. 17) The answers to the mentioned wh-questions are precious keys to establish the priorities of each individual translation, and hence to guide the translator's choice. An accurate assessment of the situation is, therefore, a must as well as a source of solutions to translation problems.
prcdant sommaire suivant

Translation and Meaning

by Magdy M. Zaky Since translation is, above all, an activity that aims at conveying meaning or meanings of a given-linguistic discourse from one language to another, rather than the words or grammatical structures of the original, we should look briefly at the most significant and recent developments in the field of study of "meaning", or semantics. Our interest here lies in the shift of emphasis from referential or dictionary meaning to contextual and pragmatic meaning. Such a shift represents a significant development, particularly relevant to translation, and to communicative register-based approach to translation. The meaning of a given word or set of words is best understood as the contribution that word or phrase can make to the meaning or function of the whole sentence or linguistic utterance where that word or phrase occurs. The meaning of a given word is governed not only by the external object or idea that particular word is supposed to refer to, but also by the use of that particular word or phrase in a particular way, in a particular context, and to a particular effect. The first type of meaning, i.e., the meaning of reference, is often referred to as the "referential" meaning, the "lexical" meaning, the "conceptual" meaning, or the "denotative" meaning. It is also sometimes referred to as the "signification" of a lexical item. There is a distinction between conceptual meaning, on the hand, and connotative, stylistic, affective, reflected, and collocative types of meaning on the other hand. Thus, we classify the last five types of meaning under one general category of associated meaning. There is a clear distinction between the logical meaning or the lexical reference of a particular word, and between the types of associated meaning. Such a distinction in the field of semantics between the lexical and the

associated may remind us of the distinction between the semantic and the communicative approach as far as the literature on translation is concerned. The reason why there is a distinction, however, is that the conceptual meaning of a word is the type of meaning which could be mainly deduced in isolation from any other linguistic or even non-linguistic context, whereas the other types of meaning, whether associative or theoretical, are broadly speaking to be derived from the context of the utterance. Hence, this is relevant to translation and translation theories. It is usually easier to find the conceptual or the logical meaning of a given word, but that type of meaning is not always telling in the case of translation. However, it is often difficult to obtain even the lexical equivalent of a given item in translation, when the translation is taking place across two different languages that do not have a culture in common, such as translation from Arabic into English and vice versa. Yet, we should not indulge in a tedious and rather worthless search for the lexical equivalent, since, even if such lexical items are easy to come by, they might not be helpful in translation.

Distinction between the referential or lexical meaning of a word and the meaning it acquires or radiates in a given context There is a difference between the referential meaning of a word and the contextual meaning of the same word. Let us consider, for example, three lexical items which have the same physical reference in the world of non-linguistic reality, but are not simply used alternatively in free variation on each other. The words 'father', 'daddy' and 'pop' refer to the same physical object, i.e. the male parent. Yet other factors contribute to the choice of one rather than the other two in different situations. These factors may vary in accordance with the personality of the speaker or addressor, the presence or absence of the male parent in question, the feelings the addressor has towards his father as well as the degree of formality or informality between the two. In the case of translation, it is almost needless to point out the significance of such factors. The same difference is recognized between referential and contextual types of meaning of lexical items, by the use of a different set of labels. Distinction is made between the signification of a given lexical item and its value or meaning when used in a particular context. In translation, consequently, the translator ought to translate the communicative function of the source language text, rather than its signification. A translator must, therefore, look for a target-language utterance that has an equivalent communicative function, regardless of its formal resemblance to original utterance as far as the formal structure is concerned. In other words, translation should operate or take place on the level of language use, more than usage. It has to be carried out in the way the given linguistic system is used for actual communication purposes, not on the level of the referential meaning or the formal sentence structure. Conveying textual effect of the original is the final objective to which a translator aspires, "A text is a whole entity, to be translated as a whole"..

Translation Quality Assessment. Strategies, Parametres and Procedures

jamal al-qinai
English Department Kuwait University KU Research Grant AE027

A Translator is severely criticized if he makes a mistake, but only faintly praised when he succeeds (Nida 1964: 155)

End-product of translation (i.e. target text) as the only material available for scrutiny, the process of decision making ignored so lack of objectivity of assessment (Hatim and Mason 1990:3) The ST writer uses a language that suits his communicative needs. The translator's task is to recover those needs. This recovery is fraught with subjective interpretations. Attempts to introduce objectivity (House 1976; Wilss 1982; Basil and Hatim 1990, Baker 1992 and Horton 1998) to develop an elaborate set of parametres, procedures and well-defined metalangue is needed in order to construct a pseudo-model for translation assessment. Drawbacks: House (1981:64) it seems unlikely that translation quality assessment can ever be objectified in the manner of natural science. It is safer to talk of the adequacy of a translation rather than its degree of equivalence Quality is relative and absolutes of accuracy cease where the end user (i.e. client) imposes his own subjective preferences of style in TT. Standardization of quality is thus a fuzzy grey area. For instance, does accuracy and good translation mean that a shoddy poorly-written, poorly-structured ST be reproduced as a shoddy poor TT? Is it professional for a translator to act as a filter, an advocate of ST Pre-linguistic era vague concepts as the spirit and flavour of ST as opposed to the natural flow of TT Cicero, a translation should be free a translation should be literal (House 1981: 2). Nida who propounded the dynamic equivalence principle. According to Nida (1964: 159) the response of TT receptors should be similar to that of ST audience. The question is whether this criterion can be tested empirically. cloze tests (i.e. asking recipients to fill gaps of words deleted in TT) Carrol (1966) informativeness and intelligibility. Mainly concerned with scientific texts Reiss (1971) called for determining function and type of source text before any quality assessment. But she stopped short form defining any objectively measurable norm to apply her approach. April 1994, conference, Nottingham timely delivery, final presentation (layout, deadlines) hardware/software compatibility, customer liaison, satisfaction, feedback, billing rates, word counting and training (ITI Conference 1994) linguistic/textual compatibility of ST and TT, only general For example, a client may want a scientific article translated for publication in another country where style is paramount or to contest the grant of a patent in which case accuracy assumes priority over style (op. cit.: 32).our interest in this study lies in textual/ functional (or pragmatic) compatibility (i.e. quality of linguistic conversion) rather than the logistics of management and presentation (i.e. quality of service). issues as timely delivery, final presentation (layout, deadlines) hardware/software compatibility, customer liaison, satisfaction, feedback, billing rates, clause 4.3 requires under Contract Review that clients should specify the objectives and readership for which the translation is intended. For example, a client may want a scientific article translated for publication in another country where style is paramount or to contest the grant of a patent in which case accuracy assumes priority over style word counting and training (ITI Conference 1994). Assessment: efficiency in syntax, semantics, pragmatics of ST within the within the cultural frame and expressive potentials of both source language and target language. Houses pragmatic-textual approach (1981: 28-9) Equivalence, therefore, is sought at the pragmatic level even if it overrides semantic meaning. In other words, the primary interest of translation is units of discourse characterized by their use-value in communication. Among the parametres raised by Newmark (1988), Hatim and Mason (1990), Steiner (1994) and House (1981, 1997), 1. Textual Typology (province) and Tenor: i.e. the linguistic and narrative structure of ST and TT, textual function (e.g. didactic, informative, instructional, persuasive, evocative etc.). 2. Formal Correspondence: Overall textual volume and arrangement, paragraph division, punctuation, reproduction of headings, quotation, motos, logos etc.

3. Coherence of Thematic Structure: Degree of referential compatibility and thematic symmetry. 4. Cohesion: Reference (co-reference, proforms, anaphora, cataphora), substitution, ellipsis, deixis and conjunctions. 5. Text-Pragmatic (Dynamic) equivalence: degree of proximity of TT to the intended effect of ST (i.e. fulfillment or violation of reader expectations)and the illocutionary function of ST and TT. 6. Lexical Properties (register): jargon, idioms, loanwords, catch phrases, collocations, paraphrases, connotations and emotive aspects of lexical meaning. 7. Grammatical/ Syntactic Equivalence: word order, sentence structure, cleaving, number, gender and person (agreement), modality, tense and aspect.