African Cultural and Literary Specificity in The Broad Translation Quality Debate

African Cultural and Literary Specificity in the Broad Translation Quality Debate
[PP: 143-158]
Wanchia T. Neba, PhD

ASTI, University of Buea
Cameroon
ABSTRACT
Beyond revisiting the byzantine and seemingly inconclusive debate on translation quality assurance and
assessment, this article investigates the extent of an across-the-board applicability of existing quality
assessment frameworks to the broad translation quality debate, against a strong backdrop of culturespecificity. It, first and foremost, exemplifies cultural and literary specificity through linguistically openended African creative writing, examines the variegated concept of translation, the volatile concept of
translation quality assurance and assessment, outlines constraints to the assurance and assessment of this
translation quality, and importantly portrays the preponderant place of metrics, rubrics and models in quality
assurance and assessment. Secondly and finally, using a blend of literary and translation theories and
strategies, it then qualitatively demonstrates from existing evidence, that quality assurance with its
acquiesced formulae will continue to be at the mercy of incontestable contextualised cultural specificity
being of necessity a provincialised and balkanised activity.
Keywords: Cultural specificity; translation as variegated concept; translation quality; rubrics and models;
creative writing; translation quality, provincialisation/ balkanisation
ARTICLE The paper received on: 30/07/2015 , Reviewed on: 30/08/2015, Accepted after revisions on: 19/10/2015
INFO
Suggested citation:
Wanchia, T. N. (2015). African Cultural and Literary Specificity in the Broad Translation Quality Debate. International
Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. 3(3), 143-158. Retrieved from http://www.eltsjournal.org
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
July-September, 2015
1. Introduction
Discussing quality in translation has
happened as if quality assurance and
assessment were a disease that could be
eradicated by a simple universal therapy,
whose main ingredients are the gamut of
principles, theories, strategies, etc, floated in
Translation Studies textbooks. Yet, while the
universal applicability of principles, theories,
and strategies is possible with texts of
typically technical and pragmatic nature,
such becomes highly diminished as the text
type becomes more and more cultural. In a
qualitative manner, this write-up investigates
the degree to which an
all-embracing
applicability of existing quality assessment
frameworks continuous to be possible,
especially against a strong backdrop of
growing
culture-specificity
and
consciousness. A discussion of the intricate
African literary and cultural text that now
increasingly demands special attention
during translation is preceded by a review
and focus on the concepts relevant to the
understanding of these issue under
examination.
2. Literature Review
African cultural and literary specificity,
the variegated concept of translation, the
translation process, the issue of translation
quality, translation quality assurance and
assessment, constraints to translation quality
assurance and assessment, as well as
translation quality assurance frameworks
constitute the menu of this review.
2.1 African cultural and literary specificity
It is an inviolate fact in Translation
Studies that cultural specificity influences
how translation quality is constructed. The
issue of African cultural and literary
specificity has been stated, discussed and
affirmed by scholars both from within and
out of African, as exemplified in the
following background considerations:
a) First and foremost, there is specificity on
account of orality: Okara (1973, p.137-138)

posits that
African ideas, philosophy,
folklore and imagery help to keep as close as
possible to vernacular expressions, and thus
do more adequately express African ideas
and thoughts (and not those of the other
European). Kourouma (as cited in Kon,
1992, p. 83) declares that while thinking first
in his native Malinke before writing in
French, he exercises boundless liberty,
cassant le franais pour trouver et restituer
le rythme africain, [breaking up the French
language in order to recreate an African
rhythm]. With specific reference to
Cameroon, Ndzana (1988, p. 147-151), (just
like Ndzi, 1985, p. 344, as cited in Fofi,
2007, p. 54) adds that la culture
camerounaise semble privilgier la langue
parle, vivante, orale au dtriment de la
langue crite, classique, normativement
bonne [Cameroonian culture seems to
prefer spoken, living, oral language to the
detriment of written, classical and
normatively
good
language],
(my
translation). Finally, Bandia (1993, p. 55)
avers that
It is generally agreed that African creative
writing in European languages has been
greatly influenced by African oral tradition
(Obiechina, 1975; Chinweizu et al, 1980;
Grard, 1986; Bandia, 1993).
Okpewho (1992, p. 70-104) then outlines
the unique stylistic qualities of African
literary works to include repetition,
parallelism, piling and association, tonality,
ideophones, digression, imagery, allusions,
and symbolisms which are all akin to oral
tradition.
b) Secondly, peculiarity of spontaneity:
Spontaneity refers to behaviour that is natural
and unconstrained and is the result of impulse
and not planning (Microsoft Encarta, 2009).
In Africa, spontaneity is a common literary
Cite this article as: Wanchia, T. N. (2015). African Cultural and Literary Specificity in the Broad Translation
Quality Debate. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. 3(3), 143-158. Retrieved from
http://www.eltsjournal.org
Page | 144
hallmark. With respect to popular

performances, Okpewho (1992, p. 33) opines
that
sometimes,
composition
and
performance happen simultaneously and the
artist has the outstanding job of
bestowing, totally unrehearsed, a traditional
pattern of imagery and diction on a brandnew subject, showing rather impressively
how in African the acts of composition and
performance can take place simultaneously
(Okpewho, 1992, p. 34).
c) Thirdly, peculiarity of creativity:
Creativity refers to the use of skill and
the imagination to produce something
new or a work of art (Oxford Advanced
Learners Compass) or showing use of
the imagination to create new ideas or
things (Microsoft Encarta, 2009).
Despite the fact that African art in general
is a communal activity, creative
idiosyncratism is still very present.
Darah (1982, p. 1, as cited in Okpewho,
1992, p. 32) asserts that
A gifted Ororile creates by deft of allusions
and analogy. As the song progresses,
metaphors are introduced. Once a
metaphorical remark or proverbial allusion
is made and explained logically later in the
song, then that piece is acclaimed a
successful one.
Okpewho buttresses Daras idea by stating
that:
The principal stylistic tools of this job are
metaphor, allusion, analogy, and other kinds
of oblique imagery designed to make it
reasonably clear who the subjects are even
when fake names are used (Okpewho, 1992,
p. 32).
d) Fourthly, peculiarity of paralinguistic
artistry: Paralinguistic artistry refers to
the accompanying resources variously
described as
nonverbal,
extraverbal,
paraverbal,
paratextual, or paralinguistic, in the sense
that they occur side by side with the text or
the words of the literature..One of these

resources is the histrionics of the
performance, that is, movements made with
the face, hands, or any other part of the body
as a way of dramatically demonstrating an
action contained in the text (Okpewho, 1992,
p. 46).
e) Fifthly, peculiarity of punning/wordplay
(and tongue-twisters): Delabastita posits
that:
Wordplay is the general name for the various
textual phenomena in which structural
features of the language(s) used are
exploited in order to bring about a
communicatively significant confrontation
of two (or more) linguistic structures with
more or less similar forms and more or less
different meanings (Delabastita, 1996, p.
128).
Though considered a global phenomenon,
unique puns and wordplay abound in African
literary art (Bjornson, as cited in Newell,
2002, p. 74) and Fofi (2007).
f) In sixth position, there is peculiarity of
linguistic hybridization /assortment:
Vakunta (2008, p. 942) posits that
African creative art consists of texts
couched in indigenized and hybridized
linguistic forms, namely creoles, pidgins,
camfranglais, and other forms of hybrid
languages. For him, it is an all-African
phenomenon in that
Africans of all backgrounds use blended
languages such as Camfranglais, Pidgin,
Moussa and Nouchis as a means of ensuring
group solidarity within a community of
practice. Creative writers use these mixed
varieties to translate the socio-cultural
contexts that inform and structure their
narratives (Vaktuna (2008, p. 946).
Gyasi (1999, as cited in Vakunta, 2008, p.
946), describes this as a creative translation
process that leads to the production of an
authentic African discourse (a third hybrid
code) that requires non-speakers to refer to

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 145

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
the writers native language and culture for

signification. Evembe (1988) as well as
Ndzana (1988, p. 153) further signal an even
more complex phenomenon of language
assortment/medleying on the continent,
which Suh (2005) qualifies as an ambivalent
situation of the use of double language.
g) Finally, peculiarity of humour: Humour,
as a meaning effect with incontestable
exteriorised manifestation like laughter
or smiling, is one of Africas major
literary aesthetic tenets. Humour abounds
in the works of Afana, Kouokam (Fofi,
2007) and a host of other African artists
(Bjornson, as cited in Newell, 2002).
Vandaele (2002, p. 150) particularly
opines that from a practice perspective the
appreciation of humour varies with
individuals as what is humorous for one
person, for instance, may just be a comic/bad
joke and therefore not really funny enough
for another. This is extrapolatable to the
wider cultural group, for after all culture is
both individual and societal. This is
particularly problematic to translation
(Attardo, 1994, p. 173-193; Antonopoulou,
2002, p. 195-220; and Vandaele, 2002).
At a time when the concept of translation
itself remains very brain-bugging, the
translation of the above traits as well as the
quality resulting therefrom calls for special
attention, especially, with specific reference
to African creative writing.
2.2 Translation: a variegated difficult-todefine concept
Conceptualizing translation has been
long,
ink-spilling,
and
ostensibly
inconclusive. But far beyond the platitude of
reciting the entire array of scholarly
definitions of translation responsible for the
difficulty to have a common definition, this
article rather attempts to appraise how far
varied perspectives contribute to the
translation quality assessment debate.
Vinay & Darbelnet (1959, p. 20); Catford

(1965, p. 4); Tweney & Hoeman (1976, p.
138); Brislin (1976); Ladmiral (1979, p. I);
Crystal (1987, p. 344); Newmark (1981, p.
7); Hewson & Martin (1991); Steiner (1992,
p. 253); and Snell-Hornby (1994, p. 4-5)
reveal that the different perceptions about
what translation really is have largely been a
function of whether scholars perceive it as an
art, discipline, process, product or
profession. The complexity of the concept is
better expressed by the following quotes:
a) the purposes of translation are so diverse and
the texts so different and the receptors are so
varied that one can readily understand how
and why many distinct formulations of
principles of translation have been proposed
(Nida, 1977, p. 67);
b) despite the numerous works on the subject,
translation remains a complete obfuscation,
something that requires the empirical rigour
of the linguist, the perspicacity of the literary
critic and voraciousness of the philosopher
all in combination in a single proposed
solution to the problem of translation
(Frawley, 1984, p. 11); and
c) translation is a widely diverging and
frustratingly empirical issue, given that
theoretical reflectionappears plethoric,
repetitive, and generally unproductive
(Hewson & Martin, 1991, p. 2). They further
enquire if there are any specific reasons for
this confusion and for the breach between
theory and practice?
Beyond and above all controversies, Ali
Darwish (1999/2001, p. 13) thinks the
fundamental issue in conceptualising
translation remains the quest for quality and
the desire to preserve original meaning
when it is conveyed or converted into the
target languages verbal expression. Yet, it
is still common knowledge that preserving
and keeping control of original meaning that
ensures the integrity of information is
Page | 146
intrinsically difficult given that in the

transformations of the translation process,
there is inherent loss of information. How
then can quality be preserved when the
tendency to lose control of original meaning
is so real?
2.3 The issue of translation quality
The immense difficulty in defining
translation undoubtedly directly impinges on
the task of assuring and assessing quality.
ISO 8402 (1994, 3.1), amongst many
stakeholders, avers that quality is the totality
of features and characteristics of a product or
service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated
or implied needs. Muzii (2006) also sees
quality as an integration of the features and
characteristics that determine the extent to
which output satisfies the customers needs.
Quality therefore implies the existence of
defects, defined by ISO (1994, 3.1) as the
non-fulfilment
of
intended
usage
requirements. Defects can be minimised if
some attention is paid to the translation
process itself.
2.4 The
translation
process
vi--vis
translation quality
Whereas Bell (1987) deplores the
tendency to ignore the process involved in the
act of translating, most translation scholars
still erroneously treat the translators
competence, the translation process and the
resultant quality, as disconnected entities. In
the same light, Ali Darwish (1999) laments
that no study so far has really tackled the
issue of process in a more pragmatic fashion.
Owing to the perplexity and intertwining
between aspects of the translation process,
Bell again avers that
if we treat texts merely as a self-contained
and self-generating entity, instead of as a
decision-making procedure, and an instance
of communication between language users,
our understanding of the nature of
translating will be impaired (Bell, 1987, p.
403-415).
Notwithstanding the important work

done on the translation process - which
constitutes i) evidence of a transaction, ii) a
means of retracing the pathways of the
translators decision-making, and iii) an
instance of communication between
language users, the process has unfortunately
remained in dire want of delineation (Ali
Darwish, 2001, p. 8). This, unquestionably,
affects discussions on what quality assurance
and assessment ought to be.
2.5 Translation quality assurance and
assessment
After perceiving quality assurance (QA)
as the act of maintaining translation services
to ensure conformance to customer
requirements or other specifications,
Gerasimov (2005, p. 1) posits that it is
implemented by the translation service
provider. He continues that QC (quality
control) is implemented by your customer
after the translation is completed and
delivered. According to Muzii (2006),
quality control (QC) is an integration of the
features and characteristics that determine the
extent to which output satisfies the
customers needs.
Because
translation quality today
remains marred by impressionistic and often
paradoxical judgments based on elusive
aesthetics (Al-Qinai, 2000, p. 497), Ali
Darwish (2001, p. 2) then clearly cautions
that without well-defined assessment and
evaluation standards and processes, quality
assessment and assurance will always be
haphazard and subject to the personal
preferences and whims of the individual
assessor or the interpretive frameworks,
bureaucratic perspectives and draconian
measures of educators and evaluators alike.
This is true, because translation is a highly
constraint-ridden hermeneutic exercise!
2.6 Constraints to translation quality
assurance and assessment

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 147

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
Ali Darwish (1999) asserts that the

ultimate goal of any translation strategy is to
manage to remove possible general and
specific constraints to translatability, and that
appreciating not only how these constraints
function but equally how they can be
managed and ideally removed within a model
or framework of constraint management is of
benefit to translation quality stakeholders.
a) General theoretical translatability
constraints: Bassnett opines that
translation is very obstacle-ridden,
irrespective of whether it is the
professional or amateur translator
concerned. She further avers that
all kinds of different criteria come into play
during the translation process and all
necessarily involve shifts of expression as the
translator struggles to combine his own
pragmatic reading with the dictates of the
TL cultural system (Bassnett, 1991, p. 104).
From the perspective of pre-translation
quality quest, Hatim & Mason (1994, p. 3-20)
outline general theoretical constraints
reflected by the following inexhaustive
categories that must be seriously metered by
the translator (the vital communicative
problem-solver), if s/he intends to attain
acceptable quality. They include the process
vs. product (Bell, 1987; Hatim & Mason,
1994, p. 4); objectivity vs. subjectivity (Reiss,
1971/77; House 1976; Wilss, 1982); literal
vs. free translation (Hatim & Mason, 1994,
p. 5; Newmark, 1988, p. 68-69); formal vs.
dynamic equivalence (Nida, 1964, p. 160);
form and style vs. content (Meschonnic;
1973, p. 349; Hatim & Mason, 1994, p. 8;
Nida, 1964, p. 169); redefining style (Hatim
& Mason, 1994, p. 9); meaning potential
(Halliday, 1978, p. 109; Beaugrande, 1978);
empathy
and
intent;
translators
motivation; translating centre; and
conditions of production ( all cited in Hatim
& Mason, 1994).
b) Specific translatability constraints: In

addition to the above general theoretical
considerations against which the
translators purpose, priorities, and
output are judged, other specific
constraints have also been identified.
According to Boase-Beier & Holman
(1988) they include conceptual (1988, p.
2); external (1988, p. 10 & 72);
phonological (1988, p. 5-6); literary
(1988, p. 5); political and ideological
(1988, p. 5); syntactic and stylistic (1988,
p. 6); and personal, that is,
Upbringing,
education,
knowledge,
sensibilities, predilections and beliefs also
contribute to the formation of the individual
personality of the translator, limiting,
defining, and also facilitating the translation
process, from the initial selection of the SL
text right the way through to the final release
into the world of its TL progeny [1988, p.
8-9]);
Other scholars add the contextual and
socio-cultural (Hatim & Mason, 1990, p. 37);
textual (Kress, 1985, p. 12); Hatim & Mason,
1998); linguistic and formal (Hatim &
Mason, 1990:192; Saussure 1916); and
conventional (Bassnett, 1991, p. 104).
In the face of all these constraints,
metrics, rubrics and models have been
fashioned in guise of frameworks to enhance
quality attainment.
2.7 Translation
quality
assurance
frameworks
According to Muzii (2006), the best way
to assess quality is to measure the number and
magnitude of defects whose features and
scope must be specified by metrics, rubrics
and models.
a) Translation quality metrics: We agree
with Sir William Thomson (1883, cited in
Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol.
4, [MUP], 1972) that:
Page | 148
When you can measure what you are

speaking about, and express it in numbers,
you know something about it; but when you
cannot
express it in numbers, your
knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory
kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge,
but you have scarcely in your thoughts
advanced to the state of science.
In this same vein, and with respect to
translation, Muzii (2006, p. 22) opines that
The best way to assess quality remains that of
measuring the number and magnitude of
defects; and when defects cannot be
physically removed, their features and scope
must be specified.[... ] The first step, then, is
to establish a model of definition of quality,
and translate it into a set of metrics that
measure each of the elements of quality in it.
Despite the above viewpoints, there has
been lack of any serious definition of quality
or provision of any real metrics, except for
Baker (1992), Zlateva (1993), House (1997)
and Schffner (1998) who from the early 90s
veritably started talking invariably of
components, aspects and factors of quality
such as accuracy, precision, correctness,
faithfulness, etc. But metrics were certainly
judged inadequate, so came the turn of
rubrics!
b) Translation quality rubrics: Another
attempt at resolving the problem of
translation quality assurance and
assessment has been from the perspective
of rubrics which Riazi (2003, cited in
Khanmohammad & Osanloo, 2009, p.
131-153) describes as an attempt to
delineate consistent assessment criteria.
He emphasizes that it enables teachers
and students alike to assess criteria which
are complex and subjective and also
provide basis for self-evaluation,
reflection, and peer review. Today, four
existing rubrics include those by
Farahzad (1992), Waddington (2001),
Sainz (1992), Beeby (2000), and Goff-
kfouri (2005). From these, a detailed

component-centred rubric that takes into
account different aspects of translation
(comprehension, conveyance of sense
and style, inter alia) has seen the light of
day, highlighting
accuracy (30%);
suitable word equivalence in target text
(25%); target texts genre, target
language culture (20%); grammar and
style (15%); shifts (8%); and addition,
omission and inventing equivalents (7%).
For Khanmohammad & Osanloo (2009,
p. 149) this is
an empirical rubric for translation quality
assessment based on objective parameters of
textual typology, formal correspondence,
thematic coherence, reference cohesion,
pragmatic equivalence, and lexico-syntactic
properties [and] can serve translation
instructors in order to come up with a more
objective assessment of students translation
works. Students majoring in translation can
also benefit from the findings of this study too
since they would certainly be able to improve
their translations if they were aware of the
comprehensive criteria used to evaluate their
translations.
c) Translation quality models: Only those
of House (1976-2001), Al-Qinai (2000),
and Ali Darwish (2001) - amongst many
are visited.
i) House, 1976 - 2001: House is credited
with the first effort to examine translation
quality in depth through a model, inspired
by Nida (1964), Toury (1995), Venuti
(1995), Catford (1965), Reiss (1971),
Wills (1974), Baker (1992), Hatim &
Mason (1997), and Hickey (1998).
Houses model (1997) is, properly
speaking, Hallidayan systemic-functional
theory-based, drawing much from the
Praque School, speech act theory,
pragmatics, discourse analysis and
corpus-based distinction between spoken

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 149

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
and written language. House (1997, p.

251) posits that
Translation criticism therefore has two
basic functions, an ideational function and an
interpersonal function. These two functions
have their counterpart in two different
methodological steps. The first and in my
estimation, the primary one, refers to
linguistic-textual
analysis,
description
explanation, and comparison, and it is based
on empirical research and professional
knowledge of linguistic structures and norms
of language use. The second step refers to
value judgements, social, interpersonal and
ethical questions of socio-political and sociopsychological relevance, ideological stance
or individual persuasion. Without the first,
the second is useless we have to make
explicit the grounds for our judgement basing
it on a theoretically sound and argued set of
intersubjectively verifiable set of procedures.
However, despite the above intense
intellectual exercise, House fails to pointedly
name the verifiable sets of procedures. And
she is aware of this when she avers that it
seems unlikely that translation quality
assessment can ever be objectified in the
manner of natural science. This is why other
models are necessary!
ii) Ali Darwish, 1999-2001: Ali Darwish
considers translation and translation
quality as a
rational objective-driven, result-focused
process that yields a product meeting a set of
specifications, implicit or explicit. If
translation is a haphazard activity, it falls
outside the scope of quality assurance
principles that are based on rationality of
process and consciousness of decisionmaking (Ali Darwish, 2001, p. 5).
iii) Al-Qinai 2000: For his part, Al-Qinai
(2000, p. 499) embarked on the search for
a model of quality assurance and
assessment
based
on
objective
parameters of textual typology, formal

correspondence, thematic coherence,
reference
cohesion,
pragmatic
equivalence
and
lexico-syntactic
properties. This eclectic practical model
targets
textual/functional
or
pragmatic
compatibility (i.e. quality of linguistic
conversion) rather than the logistics of
management and presentation (i.e. quality of
service). After all, the ultimate end-users are
interested in the quality of the product and
not the means sought to serve its creation
(Al-Qinai, 2000, p. 499).
If one agrees with Muzii (2006) that a
comprehensive set of metrics must measure
quality from several points during the
production process regardless of the model,
then the standpoints of House, Ali Darwish
and Al-Qinai should be considered as being
more complementary than antagonistic. Yet,
all said and done, the applicability of these
metrics, rubrics and models to translation
quality assurance and assessment, especially
against the backdrop of culture specificity
remains quite contentious. The circuitous
relationship between translation quality and
African cultural and literary specificity which
now
requires
special
attention
is
demonstrated in the procedures below.
3. Methodology
Four frameworks - the conceptual,
contextual, theoretical, and procedural guide this demonstration.
a) This article conceptually relies on
culture-specificity,
the
variegated
concept of translation, translation quality,
the translation process, and quality
assurance and assessment as concepts
that weave together the discussion.
b) Contextually, African cultural and
literary specificity in the broad translation
quality assessment debate continues to
occupy centre stage especially following
Page | 150
the relevant viewpoint of the role of

context in translation. Bassnett (1993, p.
160-61) posits that
Writing does not happen in a vacuum, it
happens in a context and the process of
translating texts from one cultural system
into another is not a neutral, innocent,
transparent activity. Translation is instead a
highly charged, transgressive activity and the
politics of translation and translating deserve
much attention than has been paid in the past.
Bassnett (1998a, p. 123) further avers that
The study of the practice of translation has
moved from its formal phase and is beginning
to consider broader issues of context, history
and convention called the cultural turn in
translation studies. Klimenko (2004, p. 215229) then affirms that paying attention to
context and other extra-textual practices is
crucial if one is to respect the demands of the
new philosophy of culture-consciousness.
These considerations justify the discussion in
time and space.
d) Theoretically, the following literary/text
criticism approaches and translation
theories have proven useful to this
discussion.
i) The main tenets of literary/text criticism
approaches such as the cultural
(Robinson, 1988, p. 11); intercultural
(Kim, 1988, p. 12); deconstruction
(Varney, 2008, p. 116); sociological
(Scott, 1962, p. 126); formalistic
(Jakobson, 1989, p. 26); and semiotic
approaches. (Pavis, (1976, p. 5) are
applicable in this study.
ii) In the same vein, translation theories such
as the linguistic (Nida, 1982, p. 69);
philological (Nida, 1982, p. 67-69);
sociolinguistic (Nida, 1982, p. 77);
textlinguistic (Wilss, 1982, p. 113);
semiotic (Bassnett, 1980/1991, p. 13,
cited in Baker, 1998, p. 218); and skopos
(Vermeer, 1989/2000) have been
considered.
c) Procedurally, data comes from Les
soleils des indpendances (Kourouma,

1970) because:
i) Firstly, the excerpts possess the traits of
African cultural and literary peculiarity,
ii) Secondly, they are representative of the
literary, and ideological views of other
authors (Achebe, 1958/1994); Oyono,
1956); and Ngugi (1965/1989)
iii) Thirdly, the choice is equally guided by
the fact that the translations of these
works are generally accepted in their light
(Adams (1981, in Table 1 below),
iv) Finally,
that despite the general
acceptability of their translations, many
scholars have continued to clamour for a
review of certain translated sections that
misrepresent the authors culture-specific
vision (Adams (1981, in Table 2 below).
The data that is qualitatively analysed
below makes use of an eleven-step grid
considered to be largely in tune with
Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS)
criteria (Toury, 1995).
4. Data Presentation and Analysis
The various steps for this analysis include
stating the source text, context of production,
element(s) of interest, intended standard
expression, peculiarity of item, target text,
translators strategy and theory, value
judgement, proposed translation, strategy of
proposed translation and justification, theory
used in proposed translation, in that order.
From these chronological steps, the excerpt
in Table 1 (Kourouma, 1970, p. 15 for
French, and p. 8 for English) is succinctly
described, explained and analysed to show
an accepted translation while Table 2
(Kourouma, 1970, p.13 for French, and p. 6
for English) is judged unsuccessful, and thus
in want of improvement (Akrobou, 2006;
2013; Ngeng, 2015).

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 151

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
Table 1: Successfully translated Africanised excerpt
Table 2: Unsuccessfully translated Africanised excerpt, with corrections

Page | 152
5. Findings
The above excerpts which meet the seven
traits of African cultural and literary
peculiarity outlined earlier on in this article
are a conspicuous example of Malinke
indigenous thought pattern and expression.
For instance, the verb se casser in Table 2 as
used in the source text deviates from its
dictionary meaning in French. Though
usually used to talk of inanimate objects, the
author uses it for an animate object - a sort of
direct translation of the way it is said in
Malinke. The language is simple but
dignified and characters use an elevated
diction meant to convey the sense of
indigenised speech which leaves one with a
sense of listening to another tongue,
emanating from a rich and valuable tradition.
Normatively, the characters express their
ideas
in
distorted
non-standard
French/English imbedded in indigenous
speech and thinking, likely to be
unrecognisable to those who are strange to
that background. As Okara (1973, p.137-138)
posits, these African ideas, philosophy,
folklore and imagery (which abound in the
works of Achebe, Oyono, and Ngugi) help to
keep as close as possible to vernacular
expressions, and thus adequately express
African ideas and thoughts. And this is the
crux of the matter!
6. Discussion of the Findings
A major problem faced by translators is
how to deal with cultural specificity, given
that translation is generally viewed both as an
act of interlingual communication and as a
process of cultural transfer (Dayan Liu, 2012,
p. 39). Cultural and literary peculiarity is very
typical of Africa as seen above. In this light,
Okpewho (1992, p. 367) for instance states
that on the basis of fieldwork done in
Liberialiteracy has made no appreciable
difference in the modes of oral thinking in a
traditional [African] society.
The difficulties of translating cultural and

literary specificity have thus induced scholars
to propose two major approaches to
translating them, namely foreignisation
(source text-oriented) and domestication
(target text-oriented). Whereas, it is known
that the West, for instance employs both the
domestication and foreignisation macrostrategies (Morvkov, 1993; Ladouceur,
1995; Merino, 2000; Aaltonen, 1993 & 2000,
p. 4; Upton, 2000; Kruger, 2000; Espasa,
2000), justifying what Snell-Hornby (1988,
p. 112; 1995) calls situation of source text
and function of the translation, the African
translation province has tenaciously opted
for a clearly semantic, overt and "literal"
foreignising macro-strategy in which formal
equivalence takes priority over dynamic
equivalence (domestication).
6.1 The findings in translation scholarship
The following scholars uphold the
foreignising perspective for African cultural
and literary peculiarity.
Okpewho (1992, p. 182-294) opts for a
transcription of African creative writing that
strives to reproduce with a degree of
faithfulness.the
peculiar
circumstances, and wisely retain the
narrators exploitation of the geographical
setting of the place as well as the idiom of
the time, for the narrative text is the
product of the genius of the artist or artists
working within a particular context
(Okpewho, 1992, p. 300), else it will become
typically un-African and engender the
questioning of the authenticity of the
translation.
For Bandia (1993, p. 57), the translator of
African works, ought to "preserve the
original function of the source text in its
culture, as the translator of African works
is mainly concerned with preserving the
"situation of the source text". He (1993, p.
57) terms this a carry-over of African
sociolinguistic and sociocultural values into

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 153

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
the European Language, and further

insistently states that
Translating African creative works is a
source-text oriented translation process in
which the target language, the European
language, is modified to accommodate the
African world-view. This process goes far
beyond merely substituting linguistic and
cultural equivalents. It is a negotiating
process in the sense that two divergent
sociocultural systems that are in contact
attempt to arrive at a happy solution in
expressing the African world-view in the
European language. This negotiating process
is made possible through translation
techniques such as calques, semantic and
collocational shifts (Bandia, 1993, p. 74).
ISSN:2308-5460
Still from the African province, Suh (2005,

p. 201) posits that African post-colonial
writers make a conscious attempt to sustain
an authentic African discourse, albeit in a
foreign language. It emanates from their own
cultural and intellectual background, passed
through the matrix of their own cultural
background. Suh (2008, p. 116-117) then
concludes that foreignisation is more suitable
for the translation of African creative writing.
Summer-Paulin (1995, p. 519-719) joins
African scholars like Ade Ojo (1986), and
Kourouma (as cited in Kon, 1992) to posit
that translators working with languages of
remote cultures such as African traditions
should preferably be source-text oriented
(literal translation) since that constitutes a
reflection of both a cultural system and social
organization of a specific community that
recreates a particular atmosphere and way of
thinking.
Finally, Berman (1985, p. 59, in Bandia,
1993, p. 57).) proposes "l'adhrence obstine
du sens sa lettre [obstinate adherence of
meaning to the letter], (my translation),
which allows translators of African literature,

for the most part, to
translate African thought literally into
European languages, since they understand
the significance of the rapport between
"sens" and "forme." As noted by Berman
(1985, p. 36), "littralit" is not necessarily
"mot mot," neither is it "calque." Literal
translation, as practised by translators of
African creative writing, is an example of
what Berman means when he asserts that
meaning and form are inseparable.
In all, the relationship between
translation quality and African cultural and
literary specificity is therefore bound to be
unusual, and calls for a sort of particularised
African
translation
perspective
that
challenges a blind and generalised
application of acquiesced frameworks. That
is why this article concludes with a pertinent
question.
7. Conclusion
From the above discussion, one is wont to
ask the question whose translation quality
then? This is appropriate because both
translation and translation quality are first
and foremost very volatile concepts. A few
scholars can be summoned to back this
opinion include House (1976, p. 64) who
opines that translation quality assessment
can never be completely objectified in the
manner of the results of natural science
subjects. In like manner, Pym (1998) asserts
that the scenario will continue to be
intriguing given that there is no perfect
translation or intended purpose (skopos).
Finally, Muzii (2006) states that even if
features and scope must be specified, the
attempt to strive for a single allencompassing
metric
is
not
only
troublesome, but can also be useless as a
simple metric would not reveal all problems.
Hence, the widespread concept of quality
assessment will continue to be a relative one
Page | 154
(due to many conflicting contextual

parameters, amongst which is culturespecificity) despite the laborious enterprise of
crafting and using metrics, rubrics and
models. In other words, there is, and will
continue to be incontestable translation
quality
assessment
provincialisation
/balkanisation, mindful of the strong and
growing concept of culture-specificity. That
makes it germane to make an apologia for a
cautious and contextualised application of
metrics, rubrics and models to translation
quality assessment,
References:
Aaltonen, S. (1993). Rewriting the Exotic: The
Manipulation of Otherness in Translated Drama.
In Catriona P. (ed.), Proceedings of XIII FIT
World Congress, 26-33. London, Institute of
Translation and Interpreting.
Aaltonen, S. (2000). Time-sharing on stage:
Drama translation in theatre and society.
Cleveland,
Buffalo,
Toronto,
Sydney:
Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Achebe, C. (1958/1994). Things Fall Apart.
New York. Anchor Books.
Ade Ojo, S. (1986). The role of the translator of
African written literature in intercultural
consciousness and relationships. Facets of
literary translation. Meta, XXI, 3. Canada: Les
Presses de lUniversit de Montral.
Adams, A. (trans), (1981). The suns of
Independence. By Ahmadou Kourouma. New
York: Holmes and Meier.
Akrobou, E.A. (2006). La traduction de la
culture et de loralit travers lcriture
romanesque de Kourouma, Francofona 15,
2006, 201-214. Universidad de Salamanca.
Akrobou, A. E. (2013). Traduire Kourouma
Ahmadou: Entre ambigit scripturale et
ambigit orale dans un processus de transfert
culturel, in Diandu Bi Kacou Parfait,
Approches
interculturelles
de
loeuvre
dAhmadou Kourouma, pp. 2536, Le Graal,
Montreuil.
Ali Darwish (1999). Translation Quality
Evaluation for the New Millennium, at-turjuman
online, 1999. Writescope Publishers. Melbourne.
Ali Darwish. (1999). Towards a theory of

constsraints in translation. Draft Version 0.2.
Ali Darwish. (2001). The Translator's Guide. Ali
Darwish. Writescope: Melbourne. 450 pp.
Al-Qinai, J. (2000). Translation quality
assessment:
strategies,
parameters,
and
procedures, Meta XLV:3, pp. 497-519.
Antonopoulou, E. (2002). A cognitive Approach
to literary humour Devices: Translating
Raymond Chandler. In Vandaele, J. (ed.),
Translating Humour. The Translator, Vol. 8,
Number 2 (2002), 149-172. United Kingdom:St.
Jerome.
Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic Theories of
Humour. Berlin & New York: Mouton de
Gruyter.
Australian Dictionary of Biography, Vol. 4,
[MUP], 1972).
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words - A
Coursebook on Translation. London: Routlegde.
Baker (1998/2001), The Routledge Encyclopedia
of Translation Studies, 241-245. London:
Routledge.
Bandia, P. (1993). On Translating Pidgins and
Creoles in African Literature. Traduction,
Terminologie, Redaction 6-2, 94-114.
Bandia, P. (1993). Translation as Culture
Transfer: Evidence from African Creative
Writing, Traduction, Terminologie, Redaction
6-2, 55-78.
Bassnett, S. (1991). Translating for the theatre:
The case against performability. In TTR, Vol. 1,
No 4, 99-111.
Bassnett, S. (1980). Translation Studies, 14.
New York: Methuen & Co.
Bassnett, S. (1991). Translation studies. London:
Routlegde.
Bassnett, S. (1993). Comparative literature A
critical introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bassnett, S. (1998a). Still trapped in the
labyrinth: Further reflections on translation and
the theatre. In Bassnett S. and Lefevere A.
(eds.), 1998: 90-108.
Beaugrande, R. de. (1978). Factors in a theory
of poetic translating. Assen: van Gorcum.
Beeby, A. (2000). Teaching translation from
Spanish to English. Ottawa: University of Ottawa
Press.

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 155

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
Bell, R. (1987). Translation theory: where are we

going? In Meta 32, 4:403-415.
Berman. A. (1985b/2000). Translation and the
trials of the foreign, L. Venuti (trans.), La
traduction comme preuve de letranger, Texte
(1985):67-81), in L. Venuti (ed.) (2000).
Bjornson, R. (2002). Writing and popular
culture in Cameroon. In Newell, S. (ed.),
Readings in African popular fiction, 71-76.
London: The International African Institute.
Boase-Beier, J. & Holman, M. (eds.). (1998).
The practices of literary translation: Constraints
and creativity. United Kingdom: St. Jerome.
Brislin, R. (ed.). (1976). The Implication of
Culture on Translation Theory and Practice.
Translation: Applications and research, 47-92.
New York: Gardiner Press.
Catford, J. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of
Translation. London, Oxford UP,
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopedia
of language. Cambridge, England: CUP.
Darah, G. G. (1982). Battles of songs: A case
study of satire in the Udje dance-songs of the
Urhobo of Nigeria. Ph.D thesis, Department of
English, University of Ibadan.
Dayan, L. (2012). Subtitling Cultural Specificity
from English to Chinese. American International
Journal of Contemporary Research Vol. 2 No.10;
October 2012 pg 39. Chongqing Jiaotong
University.
Delabastita, D. (ed.). (1996). Introduction.
Wordplay and translation. The Translator. Vol. 2
Number 2, 1996. United Kingdom: St Jerome.
Espasa, E. (2000). Performability in translation:
Speakability? Playability? Or Saleability?. In
Upton, C-A. (ed.), Moving Target: translation
and cultural relocation. Manchester: St Jerome.
Evembe, F. (1988). Limportance de la
smantique dans la naissance dune pice de
thtre . In Butake, B. & Doho, G. (eds.),
Thtre Camerounais/ Cameroonian Theatre:
Actes du colloque de Yaound. Yaounde:
Cameroon: BET & Co (Pub) Ltd.
Farahzad, F. (1992). Testing achievement in
translation classes. In C. Dollerup & A.
Loddergard (Eds.), Teaching translation and
interpreting
(pp.
271-278)
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Fofi, J. R. (2007). La cration linguistique

dramatique au Cameroun. Yaound Cameroun:
Presses Universitaires de Yaound.
Frawley, W. (ed.). (1984). In Search of the
Third Code: An Investigation of Norms in
Literary Translation. University of Delaware
Press; Associated University Presses.
Gerasimov, A. (2005). My golden rules for
quality assurance. Retrieved on March 20, 2015
from: http://fra.proz.com/doc/534.
Goff-Kfouri, C. A. (2005). Testing and
evaluation in the translation classroom.
Translation Journal, 9(2), 75-99.
Gyasi, K. (1999). Writing as Translation:
African Literature and the Challenges of
Translation. Research in African Literatures 302, 75-87.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Languages as social
semiotics: The social interpretation of language
and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1994). Discourse and
the translator. London and New York: Longman.
Hatim, B. & Mason, I. (1997). The translator as
communicator. USA and Canada: Oxon.
Hatim, B. (2000). Teaching and Researching
Translation, Pearson Education Limited,
Edinburgh Gate, England.
Hatim, B. (1998/2001). "Discourse analysis and
translation" In: Baker M. (ed.), Routledge
Encyclopedia
of
Translation
Studies.
London/New York: Routledge.
Hewson, L. & Martin, J. (1991). Redefining
Translation:
the
Variational
Approach
London:Routledge.
Hickey, L. (ed.). (1998). The Pragmatics of
Translation.
(ed).
Clevedon:
Philadelphia:Multilingual. Matters, 242 pp.
House, J. (1976/1997). Translation quality
assessment: A model revisited. Niemeyer,
Tbingen House J. (1977). A Model for
Translation Quality Assessment. Tubingen:
Gunter Narr.
House J. (2012). "Translation Quality
Assessment: Linguistic Description versus Social
Evaluation". META, XLVI, 2, 2001.
ISO. (1994). ISO 8402:1994 Quality
management and quality assurance Vocabulary
International Organization for Standardization.
Page | 156
Jakobson, R. (1989). The Dominant,

Twentieth Century literary theory, 26-29.
Newton, K.M. (ed.). London: Macmillan
Education Ltd.
Kim, Y. Y. (1988). On theorizing intercultural
communication. In Kim Y. Y. & Gudykunst, W.
B.
(eds.),
Theories
in
intercultural
communication, 1-25. London and New Delhi:
Sage publications.
Khanmohammad , H. & Osanloo, M. (2009).
Moving toward Objective Scoring: A Rubric for
Translation Assessment. JELS, Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall
2009, 131-153. IAUCTB
Kon, A. (1992). Le romancier africain devant
la langue dcriture . Francophonia, 22:75-86.
Klimenko, S. (2004). In Babel, No. 50:30, 193214.
Kon, A. (1992). Le romancier africain devant
la langue dcriture . Francophonia, 22:75-86.
Kourouma, A. (1970). Les soleils des
indpendances. Paris:Edition du Seuil, Paris,
Laye, C (1953), LEnfant noir, Plon.
Kress G. (1985). Linguistic Processes in
Sociocultural Practice. Victoria, Deakin
University Press.
Kruger, A. (2000). Lexical Cohesion and
Register Variation in Translation: The
Merchant of Venice in Afrikaans.
Ladmiral , J. R. (1979). Traduire: thormes
pour la traduction, Paris: Payot.
Ladouceur, L. (1995). Normes, Fonctions et
Traduction Thtrale . Meta, XL, No I, 31-38.
Merino, R. (2000). Drama translation
Strategies: English-Spanish (1950-1990. Babel,
Vol. 46 No. 4, 357-365.
Meschonnic, H. (1973). Pour la Potique II,
Paris, Gallimard.
Morvkov A. (1993). Les problmes
spcifiques de la traduction des drames .
Proceedings of XIII FIT World Congress.
Institute of Translation and Interpreting, London,
34-37.
Muzii, L. (2006). Quality assessment and
economic sustainability of translation. Gruppo
L10N Roma.
Ndzana, M. H. (1988). Le thtre populaire
camerounais daujourdhui . In Butake, B. and
Doho.
G,
(eds.),
In
Cameroonian
Theatre/Thtre Camerounais, Actes du colloque
de Yaounde. Yaounde: Cameroon: BET & Co

(Pub) Ltd.
Ndzi, O. P. (1985). Identit culturelle
camerounaise
et
expression
thatrale
camerounaise , 339-359.
Newmark, P. (1981/1995). Approaches to
Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation.
London, Prentice-Hall.
Nida, E. (1964/1977). Toward a Science of
Tanslation with Special Reference to Principles
and Procedures Involves in Bible Translating :
Leiden : E. J. Brill.
Nida, E. (1982). Translating Meaning, 74. San
Dimas, California: English Language Institute.
Ngeng, M. (2015). Appraising Adrian Adams
translation of orality in Ahmadou Kouroumas
Les soleils des indpendances as The suns of
independence. Unpublished M.A Dissertation,
University of Buea.
Ngugi, W. T. (1965/1989). The River Between.
Heinemann. ISBN 0-435-90548-1.
Okara, G. (1973). The Voice. Fontana Modern
Novels.
Okpewho, I. (ed.). (1992). Towards a faithful
record: On transcribing and translating the oral
narrative performance. The oral performance in
Africa. Ibadan, Oweri, and Kaduna: Spectrum
Books Limited.
Okpewho, I. (1992). African oral Literature.
Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University
Press.
Oyono, F. L. (1956). Le vieux ngre et la
mdaille. Editions Julliard.
Pavis, P. (1976). Problmes de smiologie
thtrale. Les Presses de lUniversitaire de
Qubec.
Pym, A. (1998). Method in Translation History.
Manchester: St. Jerome.
Reiss, K. (1971/1977/1989). Text types,
translation types and translation assessment,
translated by Chesterman A. In Venuti L. (ed.)
(2000), 160-171.
Riazi, A. M. (2003). The invisible in translation:
The role of text structure in translation. Journal
of Translation, 7, 1-8.
Robinson,
G.
(1988).
Cross-cultural
Understanding. Prentice, Hemel Hermpstead,
Hertfordshire.

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
Wanchia, T. N
ISSN:2308-5460
Page | 157

Volume: 03
Issue: 03
ISSN:2308-5460
Sainz, J. M. (1992). Student-centered correction

of translation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1916). "Cours de
Linguistique Gnrale (Course in General
Linguistics).
Schffner, C. (ed.) (1998). Translation and
Quality,
Clevedon/Philadelphia/
Toronto/Sydney/Johannesburg,
Multilingual
Matters.
Scott, W. S. (1962). Five Approaches to Literary
Criticism.
London:
Collier
Macmillan
Publishers.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1988/1995). Translation
Studies: An Intergrated Approach. Amsterdam
and Philadelphia, P.A.: John Benjamins.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1994). Translation studies, an
Interdiscipline. John Benjamins Publishing. 438
pp.
Steiner, G. (1992). After babel.
Oxford
University Press.
Suh, J. C. (2008). Drama Translation
Principles and Strategies. Epasa Moto, Vol. 3,
No 2. Cameroon: Agwecam.
Suh, J.C. (2005). The Appropriation of
European Languages in Cameroonian Literary
Works: Globalisation and the African
Experience:
Implications
for
language,
Literature and Education. Limbe, ANUCAM.
Summer-Paulin, C. (1995). Traduction et
Culture:
Quelques
Proverbes
Africains
Traduits , 519-719. Meta, Vol.40, No 4.
Montreal: Les Presses de lUniversit de
Montral.
Toury, G. (1978/2000). The nature and role of
norms in literary translation, in L. Venuti (ed.)
(2000), 198-211.
Toury, G. (1995). Descriptive Translation
Studies - And Beyond. Amsterdam &
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Tweney, R. & Hoeman, H. (1976). Translation
and sign language. In R. Brislin (Ed.),
Translation: Applications and research (pp. 138161). New York: Gardner.
Upton, C-A. (ed.). (2000). Moving Target:
Theatre Translation and Cultural Relocation.
UK:Manchester, St Jerome.
Vakunta.
P.W. (2008). On Translating
Camfranglais and Other Camerounismes. Meta:
Vol. 53, No. 4, 942-947.
Varney
(2008).
Deconstruction
and
Translation: Positions, Pertinence and the
Empowerment of the Translator. Journal of
Language & Translation 9-1. Bologna
University.
Vandaele, J. (ed.) (2002). Introduction: (Re)constructing humour : meanings and means.
Translating Humour. Translating Humour. The
Translator, Vol. 8, No. 2 (2002), 149-172. United
Kingdom, St. Jerome.
Vermeer, H. (1989/2000). Skopos and
commission in translational action. In L. Venuti
(ed.), (2000), 221-232.
Venuti, L. (1995). Translation Authorship,
Copyright, The Translator I (I):1-24.
Venuti, L. (1995a). The Translators Invisibility:
A History of Translation. London and New York:
Routledge.
Vinay, J-P. & Darbelnet, J. (1958). Stylistique
compare du franais et de langlais. Mthode de
traduction. Paris: Didier.
Vinay, J-P. & Darbelnet, J. (1959/1995).
Stylistique compare du franais et de langlais.
Mthode de traduction. In Vinay, J-P. &
Darbelnet, J (trans., 1958 version by Sager J. C.
and Marie-Jose H.), Comparative stylistics of
French and English: A methodology for
translation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John
Benjamins.
Waddington, C. (2001). Different methods of
evaluating student translation: The question of
validity. Meta, 46(2), 311-325.
Wanchia, T. N. (2013). Investigating the latent
resistance of African creative popular art to
translation. African Journal of Social Sciences.
Vol. 4 No.2, Cameroon.
Wilss, W. (1974/82).
The Science of
Translation: Problems and Methods, Turbingen:
Narr.
Wilss, W. (1982). The Science of Translation:
Problems and Methods, Turbingen: Narr.
Zlateva, P. (ed. and Trans.). (1993). Translation
as social action. Russian and Bulgarian
Perspectives. Translation Studies Series. London
and New York. 132 pp.
Page | 158

African Cultural and Literary Specificity in The Broad Translation Quality Debate

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

African Cultural and Literary Specificity in The Broad Translation Quality Debate

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

African Cultural and Literary Specificity in the Broad Translation Quality Debate

Wanchia T. Neba, PhD

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

a) First and foremost, there is specificity on

account of orality: Okara (1973, p.137-138)

hallmark. With respect to popular

the words of the literature..One of these

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

the writers native language and culture for

Vinay & Darbelnet (1959, p. 20); Catford

intrinsically difficult given that in the

Notwithstanding the important work

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

Ali Darwish (1999) asserts that the

b) Specific translatability constraints: In

When you can measure what you are

kfouri (2005). From these, a detailed

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

and written language. House (1997, p.

parameters of textual typology, formal

the relevant viewpoint of the role of

c) Procedurally, data comes from Les

soleils des indpendances (Kourouma,

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

Table 1: Successfully translated Africanised excerpt

Table 2: Unsuccessfully translated Africanised excerpt, with corrections

The difficulties of translating cultural and

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

the European Language, and further

Still from the African province, Suh (2005,

which allows translators of African literature,

(due to many conflicting contextual

Ali Darwish. (1999). Towards a theory of

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

Bell, R. (1987). Translation theory: where are we

Fofi, J. R. (2007). La cration linguistique

Jakobson, R. (1989). The Dominant,

de Yaounde. Yaounde: Cameroon: BET & Co

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies

Sainz, J. M. (1992). Student-centered correction

S-ar putea să vă placă și