Name

Class
NIM
Course
Lecturer

: Atika Fauziyyah
: English Education E
: 13202241004
: Introduction to Translation Studies
: Drs. Asruddin Barori Tou, MA.,Ph.D.

SUMMARY
Chapter 4 The Translation Shift Approach
By Jeremy Munday, 2001
Translation shifts= small linguistic change occurring in translation of ST to TT. Vinay and
Dalbernet (1958): classical taxonomy of linguistic changes in translation. Catford (1965) term
translation shift in his linguistic approach to translation. Theoretical work by Chezh scholar
Levy, Popovic, Miko (1960-1970s) who adopt stylistic and aesthetic parameters of language.
Most detail model of translation shift: van Leuven-Zwarts, an attempt to match shift to
discourse and narratological function. The problem of the subjectivity of the invariant that it
used to compare ST and TT.
A. Vinay and Dalbernets model
Vinay and Dalbernet carried out a comparative stylistic analysis of French and English.
Using the strategies DIRECT TRANSLATION and OBLIQUE TRANSLATION.
1. DIRECT TRANSLATION
a. BORROWING; THE SL word is transferred directly ti the TL
b. CALQUE; special borrowing, SL expression or structure is transferred in a literal
translation
c. LITERAL TRANSLATION; word-for-word
2. OBLIQUE TRANSLATION
d. TRANSPOSITION; the change of one part of speech for another without changing
the sense.
c. MODULATION; change semantics and point of view of the SL
d. EQUIVALENCE; translating idiom and proverbs
e. ADAPTATION; a changing cultural reference when a situation in the source culture
does not exist in the target culture.
3. The 7 categories operate on 3 levels:
a. the lexicon
b. syntactic structures
c. the message 9context)
d. word order and thematic structure
e. connectors [cohesive links, discourse markers, deixis (pronouns and demonstrative
pronouns) and punctuation]
4. Two possibilities:

a. SERVITUDE; refer to obligatory transposition and modulation due ti a difference

between the two language system.
b. OPTION; refers to non-obligatory changes that are due to the translators own style
and preferences.
Five steps for the translator to follow in moving from ST to TT
a. Identify the unit of translation
b. Examine the SL text, evaluating the descriptive, affective and intellectual; content of
the units
c. Reconstruct the metalinguistic context of the message
d. Evaluate the stylistic effects
e. Produce and revise the TT
B. Catford and translation shifts
Catford follows the Firthian and Hallidayan linguistic model, which analyses language as
communication, operating functionally context and on a range of different level
(phonology, graphology, grammar, lexis) and ranks (sentence, group, word, morpheme).
Catford makes an important distinction between formal and textual equivalence, which
was later developed by Koller.
1. FORMAL CORRESPONDENT I is any TL category (unit, class, element of structure
etc.) which can be said to occupy, as nearly as possible, the same place in the
economy of the TL as the given SL category occupies in the SL.
2. TEXTUAL EQUIVALENT is any TL text or portion of the text which is observed on a
particular occasion to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of a text.
The shift according to Catford
1. A LEVEL SHIFT would be something which is expressed by grammar in one language
and lexis in another
2. A CATEGORY SHIFTS
a. STRUCTURAL SHIFTS; shift in grammatical structure (from active to passive)
b. CLASS SHIFTS; comprise shifts from one part of speech to another (from adjective
into adverb) p.61
c. UNIT SHIFTS/ RANK SHIFTS; the translation equivalent to the TL as at the rank of
to the SL.
d. INTRA-SYSTEM SHIFTS; this shifts take place when the SL and TL process
approximately corresponding systems but where the translation involves selection of
a non-corresponding term in the TL system
C. Czeh writing on translation shifts p. 62

CHECHOLOSVAKIA introduces a LITERARY ASPECT, of that the EXPRESSIVE

FUNCTION or style of a text. LEVY looks closely at the surface structure of the ST and
TT, with particular to poetry translation, and sees literary translation as both reproductive
and a creative lab our with the goal of equivalent aesthetic effect. He sees the real-world of
translation work as being pragmatic.
D. Van Leuven-Zwarts comparative-descriptive model of translation shift
Kitty van Leuven-Zwart from Amsterdam attempts to systematize comparison and to build
in a discourse framework above sentence level. The model is intended for the description
of integral translations of fictional texts; and comprises:
1. COMPARATIVE MODEL involves a detailed of ST and TT and a classifications of all
the microstructural shifts (within sentences, clauses and phrases). The methods as
follow:
a. Passage is divided into comprehensible textual unit called TRANSEMES (she sat
up quickly)
b. ARCHITRANSEME invariant core sense of the ST transeme (to sit up)
c. A comparison is then made of each separate transeme with the architranseme and the
relationship between the two transemes in established
Main categories of van Zwarts comparative model p.64
a. MODULATION,
b. MODIFICATION
c. MUTATION
2. DESCRIPTIVE MODEL is a macrostructural model, designed for the analysis of
translated literature. it attempts to interweave the concepts of discourse level (the
linguistic expression of the fictional world) and story level (the narration of the text,
including narrational point of view) with the three linguistic metafunctions
(interpersonal, ideational and textual).
Name
Class
NIM
Course
Lecturer

: Atika Fauziyyah
: English Education E
: 13202241004
: Introduction to Translation Studies
: Drs. Asruddin Barori Tou, MA.,Ph.D.

SUMMARY
Chapter 8 Varieties of Cultural Studies

By Jeremy Munday, 2001

SUSAN BASSNETT and ANDRE LEFEVERE go beyond language and focus on the
interaction between translation and culture, on the way in which culture impacts and constrains
translation and on the larger issue of context, history and convention collection fo essay
Translation. History and culture (1990)
A. Translation as rewriting
ANDRE LEFEVERE worked in comparative literature departments in Belgium and then
in USA. He focuses particularly on the examination of a very concrete factors that
systematically govern the reception. Acceptance or rejection of literary texts; that is issues
such as power, ideology, institution and manipulation.
Lefevere describes literary system in which translation functions as being controlled by:
1. PROFESSIONALS WITHIN THE LITERAY SYSTEM,
2. PATRONAGE (support) OUTSIDE THE LITERARY SYSTEM, these are powers
(persons, institutions) that can further hinder the reading, writing and rewriting of
literature
a. THE IDEOLOGICAL COMPONENT,
b. THE ECONOMIC COMPONENENT
c. THE STATUS COMPONENT
d. THE DOMINANT POETIC
3. THE DOMINANT POETICS
a. LITERARY DEVICES
b. THE CONCEPT OF THE ROLE OF LITERATURE. p 129
B. Translation and gender
SHERRY SIMON (1996) approaches translation from gender-studies angle. sees a
language of sexism in translation studies, with its images of dominance, fidelity,
faithfulness and betrayal. TRANSLATION PROJECT = for feminist translation, fidelity is
to be directed toward neither the author nor the reader, but toward writing project-a project
in which both writer and translator participate.
C. Postcolonial theory
Simon links gender and cultural studies to the developments in POSTCOLONIALISM.
1. Spivak: translationese eliminates the identity of politically less powerful individuals
and cultures.
2. Spivak: compares the status of translation throughout the centuries to that of colonies.
3. Power relations: translation as the colonizers device used against the colonized.
4. S. Bassnett and H. Trivedis translational linked to transnational
(translation=battleground).
D. Brazilian cannibalism: the colonizers and their lg are devoured, their life force
invigorating the devourers, who transform it according to their needs.

E. The Irish context: postcolonialism in Europe.