Kyrgyz-Turkish university “Manas”

Faculty of Letters
TKI -4
Translation Criticism

Topic: FUNCRIONAL-PRAGMATIC MODEL BY J. HOUSE

AND ITS APPLICATION IN TC

Supervisor: Kasieva Aida

Done by: Rahatbek kyzy Madina

Bishkek 2020
 PLAN
• Field, tenor, mode
• Overt and covert translation
• Cultural filtering
• Statement of function
• Application of functional-pragmatic model in analysis
of the movie “The Song of the Tree”
 FUNCRIONAL-PRAGMATIC MODEL

House’s model of Translation Quality Assessment (1977, 2nd ed. 1981) is based on
theories of language use. It was designed to provide an analysis of the linguistic-
discoursal as well as the situational-cultural particularities of originals and translated
texts, a principled comparison of the two texts and an evaluation of their relative
match. The model is an eclectic one and is based on pragmatic theory, Hallidayan
systemic-functional linguistics, notions developed in the framework of the Prague
school of language and linguistics, register theory, stylistics and discourse analysis.
• In House TQA model (2001), he states that in translation criticism the critic should always
be forced to move from a macro-analytical focus to a micro-analytical one, from
considerations of ideology, function, genre, register to the communicative value of
individual linguistic terms. House’s functional-pragmatic model consists of the following
steps:

• (1) The source text is analysed along the dimensions of Field, Tenor and Mode. On the
basis of findings on the lexical, the syntactic and the textual level, a text-profile is set up
which reflects the individual textual function.

• When evaluating a translation, one should compare the target text with the source text in
terms of three register components: field, tenor, and mode.
• Field: subject matter, goal orientation, social activities (i.e. production, exchange,
communication, reproduction, etc.)

• Tenor: agentive roles, social role, social distance (i.e. degrees of formality, degrees of
politeness), and effect. This dimension includes the addresser’s temporal, geographical,
social provenance as well as his intellectual and emotional stance, i.e. his personal
viewpoint vis-a-vis the content he is portraying and the communicative task he is engaged
in.

• Mode: language role, channel of discourse, medium of discourse. ‘Mode’ refers to both
the channel and the degree to which potential or real participation is allowed for
between the interlocutors.
Table 1. A Scheme for Analysing and Comparing the Source Text and Target Text
• (2) The translated text is analysed along the same dimensions and at the same
level of delicacy.

• (3) The source and translation texts are compared. An assessment of their relative
match is established: how the two texts are similar and/or different, given differing
linguistic and cultural constraints.

• On each of the dimensions FIELD, TENOR, MODE, she differentiates lexical,

syntactic and textual means.

• Lexical means refer to choice and patterns of lexical items, collocations, co-
occurrence, use of onomatopoetic elements, etc.
• Syntactic means include nature of the verb phrase; mood; tenses; sentence
structures: simple, compound, or complex; repetition; coordination or
subordination; structure of noun phrases: simple or complex with pre-
modification or post-modification, etc.

• Textual means refer to textual cohesion, which is achieved through a number of

different procedures, namely theme dynamics; thematic structure, cohesion;
clausal linkage: additive (and, in addition), adversative (but, however), etc.; iconic
linkage, i.e. parallelism of structures; repetition of redundancy words, reference,
substitution, ellipsis, etc.
 Overt and covert translation

• Overt and covert translations make different demands on translation criticism. Covert translations are target
text focused and enjoys the status of an original in the target culture. A covert translation is thus a
translation whose source is not specifically addressed to a particular source culture audience. A covert
translation is possible by inserting a “cultural filter” between SL and TL with which culture-specific source
language norms are adapted to the norms holding in the target language community.

• Overt translations are source text (ST) focused. The source text is tied in a specific manner to the source
language community and its culture. Overt translations are ‘more straightforward’, the original text is being
taken over ‘unfiltered’ and ‘simply’ transposed from the source to the target culture in the medium of a new
language. The major difficulty in translating overtly is, of course, finding linguistic-cultural ‘equivalents’,
particularly along the dimension of Tenor and its characterizations of the author’s temporal, social and
geographical provenance.
• Overt errors are categorized into 7 subcategories:

• 1) Not Translated; 5) Breach of the SL system;

• 2) Slight change in meaning; 6) Creative translation;

• 3) Significant change in meaning; 7) Cultural filtering.

• 4) Distortion of meaning;

• A “cultural filter” is a means of capturing socio-cultural differences in expectation norms and stylistic
conventions between source and target linguistic-cultural communities. These differences should be based
on empirical cross-cultural research. In other words, cultural filtering requires reliable information about
language – that is, culture-specific textual communicative preferences within the respective language
community.
 Statement of function

• House (1977) states that the fundamental criterion of translation quality is the
equivalence. The first requirement for this question is the function. According to
J.House (1997), “the function of the original text is a degree to which the translation
is adequate in quality”. The function of a text can be determined through opening up
the linguistic materials based on the situational constraints. “The function of a text is
the application or use which the text has in the particular context of situation”
(House,1981). The statement of function based on the House’s TQA model can be
divided into two categories: ideational and interpersonal.
• The ideational function refers to language as a means to describe the things, the
external world. It also conveys information which can be stated, argued, and explained.
On the other hand, interpersonal function of language acts as a means to convey the
relationship between the author or speaker and his interlocutors. Moreover, in this
type of function language is an expression of the attitudes of a speaker or a writer.

Although the ideational functional component is not marked on any of the dimensions,
it is nevertheless implicitly present, in that the text informs the readers about certain
social activities and events involving the protagonists depicted in the text. However, the
ideational component is clearly less important than the interpersonal one, which is
marked on all the dimensions used for the analysis of the text.
 Conclusion

• J. House’s Functional-Pragmatic Model as one of the most applicable model in

Translation Studies covers aspects such field, tenor, covert, overt, cultural filtering
statement of function to analyse the ST and TT in detailed way. And analysis of
both: ST and TT are held according to steps which helps to identify similarities
and differences of translated text. Analysis of overt errors helps to defferenciate
cultural patterns of ST and its translation into TT using 7 subcagtegories of
assessment. At the end all these errors are counted in percentage.
Application of Functional-Pragmatic Model in analysis of the movie “The Song of the Tree”

Table 2: The Source Text Profile

Subject Matter Movie

Field (fiction)
Social Action General

Author’s Provenance And Stance Screenwriter

Tenor Social Role Relationship Asymmetrical

Register
Social Attitude Neutral

Mode Medium Complex (written to be heard)

Simple-complex (monologue,
  Participation
dialogue)
Genre Drama, historical musical

Positive interpersonal function of language

Function
Neutral ideational function of language
 Statement of Function of ST

• The statement of function can be divided into two categories: ideational and interpersonal. The ideational function refers

to language as a means to describe the things, the external world. It also conveys information which can be stated, argued,

and explained. On the other hand, interpersonal function language acts as a means to convey the relationship between

the author or speaker and his interlocutors. Additionally, in interpersonal function, the attitudes and feelings of a speaker

or a writer toward something or somebody are expressed either positively or neutrally or negatively. In our case statement

of function is both: ideational and interpersonal. Ideational function of language is included in following lines:

• 00:01:13 - Булактан мөлтүр суу агып. Pure like water flowing from a sparkling spring.

The purest water of the spring is described as the symbol of purity, peace, calmness.

•
00:28:27 - Чамгарагым ыш болду,Чак түштө Black smoke sooted the top of my yurt, My bright
жайым кыш болду. summer day turned into a winter night.
 Esen is describing his internal state that he is in trouble – suddenly, everyone turned down the thumbs on
him.

00:38:04 Тоңуп бараткандай бүт аалам, The world is like frozen.

All things that surround him is like mourning, being in the crape.

Interpersonal function of language is evident in following lines, author conveyed special message to his
audience with by mean of these verses:

01:26:03 - Жетсе башың булутка, When you reach the sky,

01:26:07 - Алды-артыңды унутпа. Take the time to look back.
01:26:10 - Жаман, жакшы күндөрүң, Like the tide, good and bad days
01:26:13 - Келет, кетет турмушта. Will come and go during your lifetime.

Life is struggle, one day you succeed one day you fail, and when you are at the top of success don’t forget
your past and be grateful to your fate.
 Table 3: The Target Text profile
Subject Matter Movie
Field (fiction)
Social Action Specific

Author’s Provenance And Stance Translator

Tenor Social Role Relationship Asymmetrical

Register
Social Attitude Informal

Mode Medium Simple (written to be read)

Simple-complex (monologue,
  Participation
dialogue)

Genre Drama, historical musical

Positive interpersonal function of language

Function
Neutral ideational function of language
 Statement of Function of ST
• The statement of function of TT “The Song of the Tree” is both: ideational and interpersonal.

The addresser conveys positive and negative ideational function of language through the

speeches of characters. The following lines expresses ideational function of the movie: Black

smoke sooted the top of my yurt, My bright summer day turned into a winter night – here,

the main character expresses his grief, misfortune that suddenly come to his life.

• I bow down to the greatness of the mountains, My destiny is here, in this mighty land. — the

addresser conveys his warm feelings, greatness to his motherland. Hence it is clear that there is

tight connection between addressor and his motherland.

• The interpersonal function of language is positive. The addresser’s last
message makes positive and didactical sense to its audience.

When you reach the sky,

Take the time to look back.

Like the tide, good and bad days

Will come and go during your lifetime.

• The life consists of black and white lines and when you have power and
fortune don’t forget your past.
 Table 4: The ST and TT Comparison
Source Text Profile Target Text Profile
Subject Matter: Movie
 Subject Matter: Movie 
Field Field
Social Action: General * Social Action: Specific *

Author’s Provenance
Author’s Provenance
and * *
and Stance: Translator
Stance: Screenwriter

Social Role Social Role

Tenor Tenor
Relationship:Asymmet  Relationship: 
rical Asymmetrical
Social attitude: Social Attitude: 
 
Informal Informal
Medium: Complex
Medium: Complex
(written to be heard as * *
(written to be read)
Mode if not written) Mode

Participation:Complex  Participation: Complex 
• After analysing both the ST and TT profile, including field, tenor, mode, genre, statement of function,
there were identified three covert mismatches. The first mismatch was found in ST and TT’s author’s
provenance and stance. In ST, author’s provenance and stance is screenwriter Aybek Daiyrbekov,
popular screenwriter and film director. In TT, the translators Ulukbek Turdubekov, Azim Abdyldabekov,
Marina Kolesnikova are unpopular and they are just translators.

• The second mismatch between the ST and TT was found in Social Action. The ST’s Social Action is
general and popular, because the culture, traditions of Kyrgyz people for themselves is considered to be
general and popular. But, in the TT, Social Action is specific. Because it narrates specific cultural features
of Kyrgyz people and it is specific for people from different cultures. All these comparisons are
illustrated in the table 4.

• The third mismatch took place in dimension of medium. The ST profile is complex, written to be heard,
but the TT profile is simple. Because the person who does not speak Kyrgyz, cannot understand the
character’s speech, he just reads and tries catch up the info via subtitles
 References:
• House, J. (1977). A Model for Translation Quality Assessment. Tübingen: Gunter
Narr Verlag.
• House, J. (2001). “How do we know when a translation is good”. Exploring
Translation and Multilingual Text Production: , 127-160.
• House, J. (2006). “Covert Translation, Language Contact, Variation and Change.
New York: SYNAPS.
• www.vimeo.com
• www.translationjournal.net