there are three ways to denote a translation. what are the three ways?

Translation Strategies:

A Review and Comparison of Theories

past Zohre Owji, M.A.

Abstract

Extensive enquiry has been done in the field of translation strategies. Nevertheless, the definition offered by each author or theorist represets his/her own betoken of view and their views differ from each other. Almost theorists agree that strategies are used by translators when they meet a problem and literal translation does not work. Therefore, dissimilar researchers have investigated and described various translation strategies from their own perspectives. Some best-known theories of this field are described and compared to each other in this paper. The purpose of this study was to bear witness the different theories in the field of translation strategies and to offer a full general literature review to facilitate the written report of translation strategies in future studies. Bakery (1992) offered the clearest taxonomy of translation strategies that she believed professional translators use when they encounter a translation problem while performing a translation task.

Primal Words

Translation, translation strategies, Bakery's taxonomy, theoretical enquiry, translational problems

one.0. Introduction

his study includes 4 main sections: i. Introduction; 2. Review of literature; 3. Conclusions; 5. References;

i.1. Full general

Present, in a world characterized by global advice, translation plays a primal role in exchanging data between languages. To move along the natural and professional continuum of conveying the meaning from one particular language into some other, a translator needs to acquire some skills, which are referred to as translation strategies.

Bergen (northward. d.) quotes Chesterman'south (1997) list of some full general characteristics of translation strategies:

a) Translation strategies use to a procedure;

b) They involve text-manipulation;

c) They are goal-oriented;

d) They are problem-centered;

e) They are applied consciously;

f) They are inter-subjective.

About theorists concur that strategies are used by translators when they encounter a problem and literal translation is not useful. Different researchers have investigated and described various translation strategies from their different perspectives. This paper concentrates on the differences between these theories. It intends to evidence what translation strategies exist and when and why they are used past professional translators.

2. Review of Literature

2.0. Preliminaries

In this chapter, three principal problems are discussed: 1) translation (the definition of general translation), ii) translation strategies (typologies, characteristics, models and an introduction to Baker's (1992) model of translation strategies), 3) the existing gaps and the aim of the nowadays written report.

2.ane. Theoretical background

2.one.1. Translation

Translation is a complicated task, during which the meaning of the source-language text should be conveyed to the target-language readers. In other words, translation can be defined as encoding the meaning and form in the target linguistic communication by means of the decoded significant and form of the source language. Different theorists state various definitions for translation.

2.1.2. The definition of general translation

When a translator translates a text literally, translation strategies may not exist needed.

Information technology is necessary to sympathise the concept of translation as mentioned by many translation theorists to obtain an overall picture of the translation procedure. Some of these concepts quoted by Jiraphatralikhit, Kaewjan, Klinpoon, Visitwanit (2005: vii) are equally follows: Bensoussan (1990) states that translation is closely related to the reading procedure. Hatim and Mason (1990) propose that translation is a process involving the negotiation of meaning betwixt producers and receivers of the text. Picken (1989) defines that general translation is a method of transferring oral and written messages from writing to speech communication or from one linguistic communication to another. Larson (1984) states that in general translation communicates, as much equally possible, the aforementioned meaning that was understood by the speakers of the source language, using the normal linguistic communication grade of the receptor linguistic communication, while maintaining the dynamics of the original source language text. She likewise expresses that the goal of a translator should be to produce a receptor language text (a translation) that is idiomatic; i.due east., i that has the aforementioned meaning equally the source-linguistic communication text, but is expressed in the natural form of the receptor language. Nida (1974), cited by Jiraphatralikhit et al. (2005), believes that translating consists of reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source linguistic communication bulletin, outset in terms of meaning and second in terms of style. Catford (1965, every bit cited in Jiraphatralikhit et al. 2005) views translation every bit the replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by the equivalent text material in another language (TL). Bell (1991) views translation as the replacement of a text in one language by an equivalent text in another language. Newmark (1981: 7) indicates that translation is a craft that attempts to replace a written bulletin and/or statement in one language past the same message or statement in another language. Too, he views translation as a science, a skill, an art, and a matter of taste. As a science, translation includes the cognition and assessment of the facts and the language that describes them; equally a skill, translation contains the advisable linguistic communication and adequate usage; as an art, translation differentiates expert writing from bad and involves innovative, intuitive and inspired levels; and lastly, viewing translation as a thing of taste includes the fact that the translator resorts to his/her own preferences; so, the translated text varies from one translator to another. Kelly (2005: 26-27) defines translation as the skill of understanding the source text and rendering it in the target language past using the register, the groundwork cognition, and other language resources according to the intended purpose. Therefore, a translator is a mediator of the 2 languages and cultures who can transfer the SL to the TL.

What has been discussed above relates to translation theory, which identifies translation problems and recommends the most appropriate procedure for translation in social club to solve the identified problems. So, translation can exist explained as a conclusion-making process and a problem-solving task. It is also a complicated task during which the translator encounters some problems or problematic issues which crave observation, identification and finding the suitable solution. The means by which the translator deals with these problems are called strategies. Finding the adequate strategy for solving the in a higher place-mentioned problems takes identify in the determination-making process.

2.2. Translation strategies

ii.ii.one. What is a strategy?

The word strategy is used in many contexts. In translation studies many theorists accept used the term translation strategies widely only with some considerable differences in the meaning and the perspective from which they look at it. A listing of more general definitions of the word strategy is given below:

• A strategy is a long-term programme of actions designed to accomplish a item goal (Wikipedia Committee, n. d.).
• A systematic plan, consciously adjusted and mentioned, to improve 1'due south learning functioning (Instruction Curriculum Reading Glossary, n. d.).
• A strategy is a planned, deliberate, goal-oriented (has an identifiable outcome) procedure achieved with a sequence of steps subject to monitoring and modification (Curriculum Learning Literate-Futures Glossary, n. d.).
• A gear up of explicit mental and behavioral steps used to reach a specific outcome (Deep Trance, n.d.).

Clearly, these definitions are general and tin can be related to unlike fields of study. This report mainly concerns translation strategies, although the to a higher place-mentioned definitions can be narrowed down to this research field, besides. Translation strategies have their own characteristics, through which one can gain an appropriate understanding of them.

More often than not speaking, a translator uses a strategy when s/he encounters a trouble while translating a text; this ways, when a translator translates a text literally, translation strategies may not be needed. Bergen (north. d.) mentions that strategies are not obvious and lilliputian. Although, when they translate word for word and utilise a dictionary, beginners in the area of translation remember they take fabricated a good translation; they do not empathise that a problem nonetheless exists and changes must be made at some levels of the translation. Therefore, trouble-solving is the nearly important function of the strategies. However, the question that arises here is: what is a translation problem?

2.2.2. Translation bug

According to Dr. Miremadi (1991), translation problems are divided into two main categories: lexical issues and syntactic issues.

1. Lexical problems

In the interpretation of lexical problems, Miremadi states that, although words are entities that refer to objects or concepts, a word in one linguistic communication may non exist substituted with a give-and-take in another linguistic communication when referring to the same concepts or objects.

He divides lexical bug into v subcategories:

• Directly/ denotative meaning

This kind of significant refers to those words of the source text that can be matched with those of the target text "without missing images" (eastward.yard. female parent, begetter, etc).

• Lexical significant

Lexical meaning refers to words or phrases which seem to be equivalen, although in that situation this may non be the instance; the translator must exist aware of the intention beyond the words in order not to misrepresent the writer'south message.

• Metaphorical expression

This subcategory refers to the problematic issues of translating idioms and similar expressions.

Broeik (1981) quoted by Dr. Miremadi (1991) offers the following suggestions for translating idiomatic expressions:

a) Distinguishing between ordinary expressions and metaphors

b) Having access to the resources of translating a single metaphor

c) Beingness aware of different contexts and their constraints on using metaphors

d) Correctly realizing the constraints on the translation, and rendering the message.

• Semantic voids

This subcategory includes those words and/or expressions that represent concepts that cannot exist found in other special communities. The shut equivalents may be establish, although the exact equivalent cannot.

According to Dr. Miremadi (1991), this may happen in 2 cases, subjects to extra-linguistic factors such every bit those words that have referents in a certain speech community just non in others, and field of study to intra-linguistic factors such as those concepts that may exist in 2 language communities but the construction of their utilize may be completely unlike, Dagut (1931) believes, as Dr. Miremadi (1991) mentioned, that this case occurs when the systems of lexicalization of shared expressions are different from each other.

• Proper names

The last but not the least sub-category in this grouping is the problem of proper names. Although proper names refer to individuals and can be transcribed from i language into another, sometimes the specific meaning that they comport, which do not be in the target speech community, may be lost (e.thou. Asghar Rize in Persian).

2. Syntactic problems

Syntactic problems are the other main category of translation problems; equally Dr. Miremadi (1991) quoted Nida (1975), one tin discover no ii languages that have the exact identical systems of structural organizations (i.e. language structure varies from ane language to another).

These differences include:

1. Word classes
   Languages differ from each other in the internal word germination of language classification.
2. Grammatical relations
   This difference exists amidst the languages in the way that a elective of a sentence functions within that sentence.
3. Give-and-take lodge
4. Style
5. Businesslike aspects

Considering all these problems, a translator is expected to convey the message of the source text to target readers; nonetheless, at that place is no completely exact translation between any two languages and equally Dr. Miremadi (1991) quoted Werner (1961), the degree of approximation betwixt two language systems determines the effectiveness of the translation.

ii.2.iii. Translation strategies' typologies

Unlike scholars suggest various types, categorizations and classifications for the strategies co-ordinate to their particular perspectives. Here, some of these typologies are mentioned.

Chesterman (1997), every bit Bergen (north. d.) stated, believes that in translation strategies' field in that location is "considerable terminological confusion". As Chesterman (1997) believes, the full general characteristics of translation strategies are equally follows:

i. They involve text manipulation.

2. They must be applied to the procedure.

3. They are goal-oriented.

4. They are trouble-centered.

5. They are applied consciously.

half-dozen. They are inter-subjective. (Information technology ways the strategies must be empirical and understandable for the readers not the person who used them.)

Different scholars have various perspectives to the aspects of the deed of translation, and then, they define and depict different types of strategies. Bergen'southward (n. d.) classification of the strategies includes three categorizations: 1. Comprehension strategies, 2. Transfer strategies, three. Product strategies

By his classification, he meant: commencement, nosotros read and comprehend a text. Second, we analyze the differences between the source text and the target 1, and we must decide on the kinds of strategies which we are up to use them. And lastly, we produce the equivalent text in the target language.

Lorscher (1996: 28) identifies ix basic elements, or as he called, edifice blocks of translation strategies. These building blocks are as follows:

Original elements of translation strategies

1. Realizing a translational Problem RP

ii. 5erbalizing a translational Problem VP

iii. Searching for a possible solution to a translational Problem SP

4. Due southolution to a translational Problem SP

v. Preliminary Solution to a translational Problem PSP

half dozen. Parts of a Solution to a translational Problem SPa, SPb…

7. Solution to a translational Problem is withal to be found SPø

eight. Negative Solution to a translational Problem SP=ø

ix. Problem in the reception of the Source Language text PSL

The first circuitous annotation means that there is a translation trouble of some sort, and the translator immediately finds a preliminary solution to the trouble [(P) SP], and stops working on this problem [#], or [/] decides to get out this problem unsolved and render to information technology later [SP ø].

Hatim and Munday (2004) stated that some of the main issues of translation are linked to the strategies of form and content of literal and free translations. This division tin can assistance identify the issues of sure overly literal translations that impair comprehensibility. However, the real underlying problems of such translations lie in areas such as text type and audience.

Local strategies (apropos how to handle translation problems)

Bergen (n. d.) compared local strategies to the many vital systems which deliver air, blood etc. to various parts of the body helping them to function well.

Chesterman (1997) believes, as quoted past Bergen (n. d.), that the taxonomy of translation strategies tin be presented simply. It includes a bones strategy which is: change something. In his statement, Chesterman (1997) does not refer to the replacement of elements in the source text words by their equivalent in the target text; it means that this replacement cannot be the merely task of a translator and it is non sufficient. The normal types of changes made by the translators can be classified as:

a) The words which are used in the source text

b) The structure of these words

c) The natural context of the source text

Thus, as Bergen (due north. d.) mentioned, according to Chesterman (1997), local translation strategies can be categorized into semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic changes; each grouping has its own subcategories. Too, there is no obvious stardom between them, and so it is difficult to say which exact strategy is being used. In the following subsections, Chesterman'southward (1997) classification of translation strategies is described, according to Bergen (n. d.):

• Syntactic strategies

These local strategies change the grammatical construction of the target text in relation to the source text. Although most of the strategies are applied because a literal translation is non appropriate, Chesterman (1997) presents his start syntactic strategy, literal translation. He believes that, according to many translation theorists, this is a "default" strategy.

1. Literal translation: It means the translator follows the source text form every bit closely as possible without following the source linguistic communication construction.

two. Loan translation: This is the 2nd syntactic strategy in his classification which refers to the borrowing of single terms and following the structure of the source text which is strange to the target reader.

iii. Transposition: Another term that Chesterman (1997) has borrowed from Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) is transposition that refers to whatever change in word class, for example adjective to noun.

four. Unit shift: This is a term that has been borrowed from Catford (1965) in the levels of morpheme, give-and-take, phrase, clause, judgement and paragraph.

five. Paraphrase structure alter: This strategy refers to changes which have identify in the internal structure of the noun phrase or verb phrase, although the source language phrase itself maybe translated by a respective phrase in the target language.

6. Clause construction alter: This is a term which refers to a strategy in which the changes impact the organization of the constituent phrases or clauses. For example, changes from active to passive, finite to infinite, or rearrangement of the clause constituents.

7. Sentence structure change: Information technology is a term that refers to changes in the structure of the sentence unit of measurement. It basically ways a change in the human relationship betwixt main clauses and subordinate ones.

8. Cohesion change: The mode in which the parts of a judgement bring together together to make a fluent, comprehensible sentence is called textual cohesion. Cohesion change is a term referring to a strategy which affects intra-textual cohesion, this kind of strategy mainly takes place in the course of reference by pronouns, ellipsis, exchange or repetition.

9. Level shift: By the term level, Chesterman (1997) means the phonological, morphological, syntactical and lexical levels. These levels are expressed variously in unlike languages.

ten. Scheme change: This strategy is another term in Chesterman'due south (1997) classification. It refers to rhetorical schemata such every bit parallelism, alliteration and rhythm and rhyming in poesy. Parallelism refers to like system of collocations, phrases or sentences.

• Semantic strategies

The 2nd group in Chesterman'southward (1997) classification is semantic strategy which has its ain subcategories.

1. Synonymy: Information technology is the get-go subcategory in this group. In this strategy the translator selects the closest synonym, which is non the offset literal translation of the source text word or phrase.
2. Antonymy: In this strategy, the translator uses a give-and-take with the opposite pregnant. This word mostly combines with a negation.
3. Hyponymy: It ways using a member of larger category (e.g. rose is a narrower term in relation to blossom), and also holonym is a related superordinate term, which describes the unabridged category with a broader term (e.g. flower is a hypernym in relation to rose).
4. Converses: This strategy refers to pairs of opposites expressing similar semantic relationships from the opposite perspectives (e.k. transport-receive take-requite).
5. Trope change: The formal proper name that is used for a figure of speech or metaphor is called trope which means using a term or phrase to compare two things that are unrelated with the purpose of revealing their similarity. This relates to a type of strategy called trope modify strategy.
6. Brainchild change: The other kind of strategy in the listing is abstraction change. This strategy concerns shifting either from more abstract terms to more concrete ones or vice versa.
7. Distribution change: This is a kind of strategy in which the same semantic component is distributed over more items (expansion) or fewer ones (compression).
8. Emphasis modify: This strategy increases, decreases or changes the emphasis of thematic focus of the translated text in comparing to the original.
9. Paraphrase strategy: This is the last strategy in the listing. According to the overall meaning of the source text, information technology creates a liberal approximate translation, some lexical items may be ignored in this sort of strategy.

• Pragmatic strategies

1. Cultural filtering: According to Chesterman (1997 as cited in Bergen n. d.), the beginning sort of strategy in this group is cultural filtering. Information technology may be described equally the concrete realization, at the level of linguistic communication, of the universal strategy of domestication or target culture-oriented translation. This strategy is mostly used while translating culture-spring items.
2. Explicitness alter: In explicitness change strategy some data of the source text maybe added; or deleted to make the text more than or less explicit.
3. Information change: The next type of strategy is information change which is similar to the previous strategy; however, hither the inverse information is Non implicit in the source language text.
4. Interpersonal change: This strategy is used to touch the whole style of the text to make it more than or less informed, technical etc.
5. Speech act: In that location is another strategy the changes the nature of the source text speech act, either obligatory or non-obligatory (eastward.k. from reporting to a command, or from straight to indirect speech).
6. Visibility modify: This is a strategy that increases the "presence" of either the writer of the source text or its translator (e.m. footnotes that are added by the translator).
7. Coherence change: Some other strategy is coherence alter which is similar to cohesion change which was mentioned in the previous department ( syntactic strategies). The simply difference is that, cohesion change concerns micro-construction level (e.chiliad. a sentence or a paragraph), merely coherence change concerns a college textual level (i.east. combining dissimilar paragraphs to each other in a way different from the source text).
8. Partial translation: This is a strategy that refers to translating a office of a text, not the entire text (e.g. song lyrics or poetry).
9. Trans-editing: Every bit Bergen also stated, co-ordinate to Stetting (1989), another strategy which tin can be mentioned in this section is trans-editing that refers to extensive editing of the original text when necessary (i.e. changing the organization of the source text information, wording or etc).

The above-mentioned strategies present the classification of Chesterman (1997) cited past Bergen (n. d.). It is clear that all strategies tin specific cases of "changing something," which is, as Chesterman (1997) believes, the basic strategy of translation.

The levels on which these translation strategies work differ from each other; and as Bergen (n. d.) stated, this may pb to terminological defoliation amidst researchers who are concerned with translation studies.

As Venuti (2001) states, from Vinay and Darbelnet'southward (1958) point of view, translators tin can select two main methods of translating which are called: straight/literal translation and oblique translation.

When literal translation is not possible because of lexical and syntactical differences between the 2 languages, oblique translation is used.

Oblique translation includes seven subcategories which are as follows:

1. Borrowing: that is used to tackle a meta-linguistic departure. Information technology is the simplest strategy of translation that means using source language terms in the target text.
2. Calque: This is a special blazon of borrowing in which the borrowed expression is literally translated into the target linguistic communication.
3. Literal translation: that ways rendering a source language text into the advisable idiomatic or grammatical equivalent in the target language.
4. Transposition: that is substituting one word grade with another without changing the pregnant of the message.
5. Modulation: this ways changing in bespeak of view (east.m. irresolute part of speech).
6. Equivalence: this refers to rendering 2 situations past different stylistic and structural methods; these ii texts include the source text and its equivalent text which is the target text.
7. Adaptation: that refers to those situations when cultural differences occur betwixt the source language and the target language. Thus, translation can be considered as a special kind of equivalence which is situational equivalence

The above-mentioned strategies fit the classification of Vinay and Darbelnet (1958), which shows some similarities with Chesterman's classification; however, as we tin come across above Chesterman's (1997) nomenclature is clearly more detailed. All the to a higher place-mentioned strategies are theories which are named differently by different theorists. However; if ane wants to examine the applicability of these strategies, at that place would exist no clear borderline betwixt them. Moreover, they are just some of the strategies that can be used by a translator, and information technology seems that there are different options that a translator may accept while doing the translation. However, there is no hierarchical order of more or less often used strategies. Baker (1992) offers a taxonomy of eight translation strategies, which are used past professional translators.

Baker's taxonomy: Mona Bakery (1992: 26-42) lists eight strategies, which accept been used past professional translators, to cope with the problematic issues while doing a translation chore:

1. Translation by a more general word
   This is i of the most common strategies to deal with many types of nonequivalence. As Bakery believes, it works accordingly in nearly, if not all, languages, because in the semantic field, meaning is not linguistic communication dependent.
2. Translation by a more neutral/ less expressive give-and-take
   This is another strategy in the semantic field of structure.
3. Translation by cultural exchange
   This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a target linguistic communication item because its affect on the target reader. This strategy makes the translated text more than natural, more understandable and more familiar to the target reader.
   The translator's decision to apply this strategy will depend on:
1. The degree to which the translator is given license past those who commission the translation
2. The purpose of the translation
4. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation
   This strategy is usually used in dealing with civilization-specific items, modern concepts, and fizz words. Using the loan discussion with an explanation is very useful when a word is repeated several times in the text. At the get-go fourth dimension the word is mentioned by the explanation and in the side by side times the discussion can be used by its own.
5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word
   This strategy is used when the source detail in lexicalized in the target language but in a different grade, and when the frequency with which a certain course is used in the source text is manifestly higher than it would exist natural in the target language.
6. Translation past paraphrase using unrelated words
   The paraphrase strategy can be used when the concept in the source item is not lexicalized in the target language.
   When the meaning of the source particular is complex in the target language, the paraphrase strategy may be used instead of using related words; information technology may be based on modifying a super-ordinate or only on making clear the significant of the source item.
7. Translation by omission
   This may be a drastic kind of strategy, but in fact it may be even useful to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular detail or expression is not necessary to mention in the understanding of the translation, translators use this strategy to avoid lengthy explanations.
8. Translation past analogy
   This strategy can exist useful when the target equivalent item does not cover some aspects of the source particular and the equivalent particular refers to a physical entity which tin be illustrated, peculiarly in social club to avoid over-caption and to exist curtailed and to the bespeak.

As it is obvious, each theorist offers his/her own strategies according to his/ her perspective; even so, Baker's (1992) taxonomy of translation strategies include the most applicable set up of strategies, because it shows the strategies which are used by professional translators. So, this definition indicates the applicability of these strategies, i. e. not only is it a ready of strategies but it can too be tested by professional translators to run across to what degree they work if at all.

3. Conclusion

In this written report, translation in general, translational problems and mainly translation strategies were described, and different theories of translation strategies were mentioned. It was shown that different theorists propose various definitions of translation strategies according to their different perspectives. Moreover, it was mentioned that Baker (1992) lists the near applicative set of strategies. She does non but name the strategies, simply she also shows the awarding of each.

five. References

1. Bakery, M. (1992). In other words: A course volume on translation. London: Routledge.

2. Bong, R. T. (1991). Translation and translating: Theory and practice. London and New York: Longman.

3. Bergen, D. (n. d.). Translation strategies and the students of translation. Jorma Tommola, 1, 109-125. Retrieved July 21, 2010, from http://www.hum.utu.fi/oppiaineet/englantilailentilologia/exambergen.pdf .

4. . Hatim, B., & Munday, J. (2004). Translation: An advanced source book. London: Routledge.

v. Jiraphatralikhit, J., Klinpoon, Southward., & Kaewjan, Due south. (2005). An analysis of strategies in translation of the movie subtitle: Behind the painting.Research Gate, one, 54-71. Retrieved May 21, 2011, from http://aut.researchgateway.air-conditioning.nz./handle/10292/870.html.

half dozen. Kelly, D. (2005). A handbook for translator trainers: A guide to reflective do. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome.

vii. Lorscher, W. (1996). A psycho linguistic analysis of translation processes. Meta, XLI, 1, 26-32. Retrieved May xviii, 2009, from http://erudit.org/revue/meta/2004/v41/n1/029689ar.html.

8. Miremadi, South. A. (1991). Theories of translation and interpretation. Tehran: SAMT.

ix. Newmark, p. (1981). Approaches to translation. Tehran: Rahnama.

10. Venuti, L. (2000). The translation studies reader. London and New York: Routledge.

© Copyright Translation Periodical and the Author, 2013
URL: http://translationjournal.net/journal/63theory.htm

banksthouggerve.blogspot.com

Source: https://translationjournal.net/journal/63theory.htm

Share this post