APPROACHES

TO TRANSLATION

PETER NEWMARK
Polytechnic of Central London

e
PERGAMON PRESS

Oxford New York Toronto Sydney Paris Frankfurt

 Foreword

In this Volume Appn’ouiheo to Tn’anulaoon Pmfosson Peter Neismank of Polytechnic of

Central London has made an importtntnbution to a mono satisfaetiiendcnntanding
of the neat nature of translation ‘rVideacquaitttattce nsith the ttte natute ott
trauslatton theont many yeats of enpenience in teaching transtation techniques. and
tibstousespentiso as a translator hose oil contributed to this melt illustrated and highft
1 useful contribution to a bettet comptehennon of the many phases ot the tnanslaton’s
“ Pnufussun Nemmunk’s majoe centnibutiun is in a detailed tneatment of semantic is
communicatise translating in mhich semantic translation focuses pnimaniln upon the
semantic content of the source test and communscatise trunsfatsor focuses ossentia fly
upon the comprehension and respnnse of receptors This ifisninotion hoi.omi’s
especially relesant for the mide diserstty of test types mhich Professor Neismank

This appnoach no translation flatly rejects the pnoposntioo that translation is a

science, hut it does insist on treating the basic propositions of translation in tenms of a
theinny of comiounication. one n’hich is not nesinutod to a single letcnaeu oeono on test
type hut mhich has applicability to a mide nange of discoutse and related pnehfems.
Accordingly, this solunne deals estensit’efy mith the probleussof tiguratiue language
and proposesanumben of saluablr suggestions as to hem those can and should he
handled.
Professor Nemmark’s teachin gespenience leads him to deal mith a uumhen itt
mutters mhich most hooks on translation fangefyosenlook e g. the rendering of
peeper names and tittet and the translation on inetalinguanic tests, mhiclt. cub lie
esceptson of lyre. poetny. are perhaps the most difficult types. of tents tone uden
mtthout considerable neadteistments in content and form
‘he seeitnd pant of this sofuine treats not only a mide nange of pnacnicul issues.
includnng punctuation, translation techniques and technical translating, but at sit some
elements of central importance to any student of translation—e.g. the significance itt
linguistics for translation and the nelesanceof translation thconies to the translator’s

Probably some of the most irsightfut comments in this sofume are those mhsch
suggest a haste for a critique ot translation methodology something mhich one could
mellenipectof nomeonemhohas hadsueh a longard rich esperiener in teaching prospecrise translators and esalaarsng their rf ons.
EUGEnic A.Niea
April
Preface

I first wrote or translation in 1957 for the beg-defunct Journal of Education—ar

aeticle which is daly eecoeded in the Nida (1964) end Jumpelt (1961) bsblsogeaphres. in
1967 I started writing again, not long nftet Anthony Crane and I had launchedlhe frrst
falf5ime pastgradaare coarse in technical and specialsoed translasror at what was then
tLeipeig
he Hofbcrn CollSchool
ege at Law, Lar(orgaagesrather,
and Commerasce. InI lasaw
cr, I am them
somelhsngwhen
eta compnlsIisfirst
’e writee,became
bat I am first a trnserestrd
eacher, and though 5rnowerranslasros
mach to Nrda and rho
theory, she Fsemdops’achen wrisers), she main source of strmubatror for my papers,
and more parsicalaely my propositions, rs my classes.

Linguistics, in the modern sense of the word, did not esist in Great Brrrarn 25 years
ago escrps perhaps at J. R. Fir h’s SOAS (School of Osienral and Afr car Ssudses) at the Unicersity of London. In its wake, translation theory is slowly deseboprrg from a
series of rather genreal segecrions and essays on the merits of faithfal and free
rsansbasioss—irserspersed with clichified epigrams identifying rranslatior wish women.
carpets, traitors, coass, mirrors. Tarkish sapessry (the res’rsse ssde), coppcr coins,
false portraits, clear arcaloaoed glass, masical sranscsiprions, wires, heroism and
folly—to represens an iderrifiable and somewhat pecalias discipline. Iris an academrc
pursuit that is dependerr apor and apparently sabordinase so a praclical eserciso. Ira
sense it it at third remos’c. Those who can, wnise; those who cannot, tsarslase; Ihose
who cannot translate, write abous translation. Howet’es, Goethe and a boss of
respectabte writers who wrote well, translased well and wrose well aboar translation
are an obstoas disproof of this adopted Shasianism.

The fascinasion of transfation rheory lies in rho large scope of irs persinerce, its basic
appeal (the concern wish words) and its disparate lords, from she mooning wishin a
contest, of, say, a fall stop to the meaning within another contest of, say, she word
‘God’. Translation theory’s present sranding is rot yes soccer. To begro wish,
‘eserynnr’ has news about ssanslation, many hare written aboat is, few hare written
hooks about it. Iris taught at rations anisessisies in she Federal Repablsc, she GDR
and in other Eastern Earn pear coon tries; as she aniressisies of Paris, Amsterdam,
Montreal, Ottawa and Tel-Arm. ‘Verrons-naas an ions figurer aas programmes des
unisersités an coats do “Sciences de Ia Traduction” qoi pbacerais a lear uste tang be
traducteur or l’interprfte dons Ia commaraaté calsurelbe?’ M. S. Williams, Président
of the Ecole do Tsaduction et d’irterprftatior of Genera Unisersity, wrote ssisslully
in Pas’allèleo, 1978. As far as I know, sach courses are an known in moss anglopheoe
counttirs. In thc United Kingdom there hare been nndrrgradaate coarsen for the lost
6 years at the Polytechnic of Central London; the Unisessity of Dandco and
Portsmouth Polytechnic run a coarse in conunction with their German options, and
 Prrf use

Bristol Polytechnic is about to start a course. Three is still no chain in

theory.

Ibounds
hose always inteand
nded to wrtoite agrasp
teslbook of the
translatiscope
on theory andofpractmyice whensubject.
I gise up tul -timAse teachiting.is,I shoulI dstillthen besec
in a bettmany
er posit au tovirtually
understand the
neglected urras and topics. In the meantime, I am happy to follow Vaughan James’s
irritation to publish some of my papers.
I hose seleered two introductory papers; three on communicate’c and semantic
translation, which is my main contribution to general theory; one on texts related to
lterms—which
anguage functions, to which Iisshalperhaps
l later add papers rthe
elating most
to the exprepractical
sser and intormativaspect
e language tuncrofions;translation
one on the translatiotheory—and
n of encyclopaedic and cultwo
tural on
synonymy and metaphor; and, finally, from three papers I am reproducing ncarty l5f
so-called propositions or translation (these a not too distant echo 0g Nietzsche’s
paragraphs, I hope) which range from large topics such as the status of translatton as
an academic exercise and its relation to language-teaching and etymology to indication
of the srnsr-valurs at the various punctuation murks.
I am awarr of many gaps: such topics as lexical and grammatical ambiguity, the
translation of porrry, trchnieal translation (I havr publishrd papers on medical
translation in thr Incorporated Lingaint, vol. 14, nos. 2 and 3, 1976, and in the Bs’iiish
MedieatJoarnat, Dec. 1979), synonymy (discussed in ‘Some problems of translation
throry and methodology’, Fr-emdnpr-aehrn, 1978—9), thr translation of plays, the
history of transtatinu, translation’s influrncr on culture ore hardly touched on. Other
subjects such as thr unit of translation, translation rquivalrncr, tronslation invutiancr,
detailed schrmes for assrssing translation, I regard as dead docks—either too
theoretical or too arbitrary.
With many limitations, those paprrs attrmpt to discuss certain significant aspects of
translation and to give some indication of its importascr in transmitting culture, in
revitalizing langauge, in interpreting texts, in difgasing knowledge, in saggrsting the
relationship betmern thought and language and in coutribating towards understanding
between nations. That is a mouthful, so I mould add that some of the anroding
fascination of the pursuit of words and things and attenancrx rubs ofl onto the pursuit
of translation rules and recipes.
I thank Eugene Nida for writing the Foreword, and I gratrfally acknowledge help
from Pauline Newmark, Elizabeth Nrwmark, Matthew Newmark, Anthony Crar, -,
John Trim, Vera North, Derek Cook-Radmorr, Ralph Pemberton, Ewald Osers,
John Smith, Ales Auswaks, Michael Alpert, Duncan Macrae, F. Hirst, Rosemary
Young, Roger Lumburt, M. R. Weston, Roger Barrett, Kathanina Reins, Bernadette
Millard and Dominique Steggle.
Pcxcn NcwMa,ntc
Polytechnic of Central London
Acknowledgements

The aathoe and pabtithees gealefnlly aaknosnledge peesnsssson to reprInt entracts trees
articles in the tollossieg joarsats

The case foe preos’, The or of Eoglish 25(3) 225-8, Spesng 1974

‘Beok-renira )G Steiner’ Af;er Babel)’, trscorporsssed Lsrsgsses 14)4), October 1975

‘Alayesan’a approach so nedssa) franatatsnn, pso 11’, trscorporaod Lsrsgsaol 15(3) 63-68, Sanner 1976

‘The tenaltatian of netaphee’, Babel (2) 1980

Contents

Part One: Aspects of Translation Theory 1

1. Thetheoryaedthecraftoftraeslatjoe 3
2. Whattraeslatiootheory:sabout 19
3. Coererueicatjce aed seeraetictraoslatjoe (I) 38
4. Thought, speech aed traeslatioe 57
5. Coermuelcatice ared seeraetic translatioe (II) 62
6. Thettseslshoo of proper castes sod iestituhoeal aed cultural terers 70
7. Thetraeslatioe ofreetaphor 84
0. Thetraeslatjoe prooessaed syeoeyery 97
9. Traeslaeioeandthemetaliegualfueotioooflaeguage 105

Part Two: Some Propositions on Translation 111

lotroductioe 113
Lieguiseiosoftraoslatioe 114
Theoryofteanslation 127
Techniques 145
Aspeotsof meaning 161
Pooctuation 171
Tootaealysjs 176
Wideequestloes 180
Technical translation 187
Notnsto peopositloes 189
Bibliography 191
Name iedeo 197
Subject iedeo 199
PART ONE

Aspects of Translation Theory

1. The theory and the craft of translation

The first teacesof translatten date team 3000 tc, dastagthe Egypttatt Old KtBgdem, tn
the atea at the First Cataract, Elephasttitte, svheee ttscnptsens tu twa langaaget have
beet feutd. It became a sigtificant fader t the West tn 300 nc, when the Remans
leek ever wholesale maay elements at Oteek culture, tnclading the whale eeltgseus

appar atus. In the twelfth century, the West came ate centact wtth Islam tn Meertsh Spain. The silaatien lat’oaeed the twa essential coaditiens foe large-scale teonslat on
(Stonig, 1963): a qaalitative ditfenence n collate (the West was infetier bat scsenttlt’
catty acquisitive and receptive to new ideas) and cettttaeas cettact between two
languages. Whet the Moorish supermacy collapsed in Spain, she Toledo school of
teanslators translated Arabia versions of Orrrk scientific and philosophical classrcs.
Luther’s Bible translation in 1522 laid the Inundations of modern Oerman and King
James’s Bible (1611) had a seminal influence on English language and litrratatr.
Significant periods of translation perceded Shakespeare and his contemporaries,
French classicism and the Romantic Movements.

The twentieth cenluty has been culled the ‘age of translation’ (Jompelt, 1961) or
‘reproduction’ (Benjamin, 1923). Whereas in the nineteenth century translation was
mainly a one.way means of communication between prominent men ogleltees and, to
a lessee degree, philosophers and scientitls and their educated read net abroad,
whilst teade was conducted in the language of the dominant nation, and dtplomacy,
previously in Latin, was in French, international agreements between state, public
and private onganieations see now translated for all intetested parties, whether on not
the signatneies andeestand eaab other’s languaget. The setting op of a new international
bndy, the constitution of an independent stale, the formation of a multinational
company, gives translation enhanced political importance. The esponeulial
increase in technology (patents, specifications, documentation), the attempt to being
isle deseloping countries, the simullaneous publicalion of the same book tn vanious
languages, the increase in world communicatson, has correspondingly increased
requirements. UNESCO, which up to 1970 published an Index trawslaeionum,
recorded a 46-fold increase sinae 1948, with translations into Oeeman nearly twice as
many as into Russian, the second most numerous. (Correspondingly, most theoretical
literature is in German.) Scientific, technical and medical journals are translated
wholesale in the USA and USSR. The EEC now employs 1600 translators. In 1967,
80,000 scientific journals were being teanslated annually (Spitzbart, 1972). Some
‘inteenatinnal’ writers (in the age nf ‘inteenatinnal’ caitsee and world-literature)
tmmediately sell mnee widely in translation than in the original, whilst others in Italy -
4 Approaches to

and the smatter European eetttttries depend for a husng on hp translattott of these
storks as melt as their eon

the teanstation ot titeratare in the ‘eninon’ langoages, partteutarty te the deeelopstsg

cosnteies.umsschnegteeted.

te the s’oletnte et transtatien. tittte svas tvestton abeut tt. The tutder aspects
mete igooned: trattstatiett’scentnibatiotn to the dot’etopment of nattonat tangoages, ttt
to meoninf, thooght and the tanfaafe uniteesats. It stat mamty dtteutsed to

t(55
eems ofnc)(a) thetirst
conflict betchampioned
ween tree and literal trasense
nslatson, andagainst
(b) the eontradsetwords
son betweenandts inhersaid
ent impossia translator
bil ty and its absolutmast
e necessitybe(Goetesther
he. 1826). Cseenean
interpreter or a rhetorician. The classical essays are those of St. Jerome (400), Luther
(153(f), Deyden (1684)—all fatouring colloquial and natural rendertnfs. Tytlee wrote
the fsest significant book on translation tn 1790, stnting that ‘a good translatson su one
in which the merit of the original work ts so completely transfused tnto anothee
language an to be as distinctly apprehended and as strongly felt byanattse at the
coantryto which that langaage belongs as it is bythose who speak the language of the
original work’. In the nineteenth centary, the important essays and references by
Goethe (1813, 1814), Hamboldt (1816), Not’atis (t798), Schteiermacher (1813),
Schepenhauee (1851) and Nietesehe (1882) inctined towards mote literal translation
methods, white Matthew Arnetd (1928) fan’oueed a timple, dieect and noble style for
teasslating Homer. In the twentieth century, Ceoce (1922), Grtega y Gasses (1937)
and Valery (1946) questioned the possibility of adeqaate translation, particularly of
poetry. Benjamin (1923) saw translation fitting in the gaps is meantng inaunts’eesal
language. He recommended Ittenal translation of syntas as well as words: ‘The
sentence is a watt blocking out the langaage of the eriginal, whilst word foe word
translation is the arcade.’

The above is a brief conspectus of views inthe pre-tingaissics period of translation. Gn

the svhotr, they make ne attempt to distinguish types en quality of tents (which are
mainly Biblical or litreary), and while they are strung us theney, they are shoes us
meshed and practical euamples. They show a gradual transition trom a natatat or free
treatment towards a literal analysis, if not teanslatien, af the original, bat there is no
develnpmrnt of a theory, and many of the writers mere not aware of each other’s

Wslh the increasing number of translator and reviser teams for dneuments and
glussarses, the fuemulation of some teanslatiun theory, if nnly as a frame ef reference,
becnmes necessary. The need is reinforced by the prutiteratior of terms uf art, in
partteulae of technological terms—in chemistry, fur instance, a hundred intersatinnaa
munth, in electronics, a fete thousand a year (Spitzbart, l972)—and by the
denser to standardiar the teeminelegy, islet- and inleelingually. But the main reasan
 The theory and the craft of translation 5

for formalating a translation theory, for proposing methods of translation related to and dented from it, for toaching translation, for translation courses is the appalltsg
budnrss of so many puhlishrd translations (Widmrr, 1959). Literary or oon-litoraey
tmodern
ranslations withoutforeign
mistakes are writers
rare. Already inare
1911, thmere
e Encyclopaedihackwork
a Britannica statedcarelessly
in a good article absoesecuted
edty restricted to litebyrary traincompetent
nslation, ‘Most tensions of
hands.’ Now that accurate translation has become goner ally politically important, tho
need to ins’estigote the subject is urgent, if only to agree on general principles.

Translation theory deeis’es tram compaeatis’e linguistics, and within linguistics, it is

mainly an aspect of semantics; all questions of semantici relate to translation theory.
Sociolingoistics, which investigates the social registers of language and the problems
of langnages in contact in the same or neighbouring countries. has a continuous
bearing on translation theory. Sociosemantics, the theoretical study ofpai’ole—tanguage
in content—as opposed to tangue—the code or system of a languagc—indicates
the relevance of ‘real’ esamptes’—spoken, taped, written, pointed. Since semanticu is
often presented as a cognitive subject without connotations, rather than as
in commanication, semiotics—the science of signs—is an essential factor in
theory. The American philosopher C. S. Prime (1934) is usually regarded as its
foandee. He stressed the communicative factor of any sign: ‘the meaning of a sign
consists 0f all the effects that may coneeis’ably hate practical bearings on a particular
inteepeetant, and which will tory in accordance with the ioteepeetaut’—no sign,
therefore, has a sell-contained meaning. Typically, to the reades an iced oIly way
mean a flatonerd frozen confection on a stick (as a non-participant, the purpose of the
object is not important to him), but to the manutacturer ii means a peotitabte source
of income, to a housewife a messy nuisance toe which she gets a demand all the year
round, to a child a satisfying cold drink on a stick which lasis a long time. It one puts
oneself as reader 0g a translated tent in the place of the manufacturer, the hoasewite
or the child, the importance of Peirce’s theory ot meaning Inc translation theory is
clear. Charles Morris’s (1971) division of semiotics into syntactics, the relation of signs
to each other; semantics, the allocation ol signs to their real objects; and pragmatics,
the relation between signs and their interpreters, has been taken as a model by the
Leipzig translation theorists (Neabeet, 1968, 1972; Kade, 1965, 1968) who hate been
particularly sensitive to the peagmatics of political statements. Thus what is approvingly
translated as Fluchthelfes’ in the Federal Republic would be rendered pejoratively
as Moesechenhdndles in the GDR.

A translator requires a knowledge of literary and non-literary testual criticism, since

he hat to assess the quality of a test before he decides how to interpret and then
translate it. All kinds of false distinctions have been made between literary and
technical translation. Both Savory (1957) and Reiss (1971) have written that the
technical translator is enocerned with content, the literary translator with form. Other
writers have stated that a technical translation must be literal, a literary translation
must be free—and again, others have said the apposite. A traditional English
snobbery pats literary translation on a pedestal and regards other translation as
5 Approaches to

hackwork, or less important, or easier. But the distinction brisseen careful, srnsstive
and elegant writing—proper words in proper places’, as Swill put it—on she one
hand, and predictable, hackneyed and modish phrases—in fact, bad writing—en she
other cats across all this. A translator mass respect good welling scrupulously by
accoanlrovoiting for its langaage, structures and content, whether she piece is scientif c or poetic philosophical or fictional. If she writ ng is poor, il s normally his daly to
whethreitistrchnicaloearoatine,commerciaoedhestsrerThefumic

dithatl ereocemore
‘between thattention
e artistic and the non-is lpaid
iterary is thtoat thconnotation
e hess is symbolical or aland
legoricalemotion
and the second reinpresimaginative
entational in intention; sliterature.
he dif erence in transThe
lation is
translatorhaslobragOodjadgrofwrisinffhemust assessnotonlylhelsteeary
qaalisy but she moral seriousness of a test in the sense of Arnold and Leavis.
Morwhom
eover, anydiscass
reading in s ylistranslation
ics, which is at she intasersectwelt
ion betweenaslinguicomparative
stics and literary crit cismliteratare,
, sach as a study of Jwilt
akobsanhelp
(1960, 1966)him.and Spsteer (194f), both of
Logic and philosophy, in parlicular ordinary language philosophy, have a beaning on
thr grammatical and lesicat aspects of translation respectively. A stady of logic will
assist the translator to assess the truth-values underlying the passage he is translating;
all sentences depend on presappositions and where the sentences are obscure or
ambiguous, the translator has to deirrmine the presuppositions. Moreover, a iranslalion-rule
such as the following on negations (my own) derives from logic: ‘A word
translated by a negative and its noun or object complementary term may be a
satisfactory equivalent.’ (Thus a ‘female’ is ‘not a male’.) A word translated by a
nrgaiivr and its verb or process converse term is not a satisfactory equivalent,
although the equivalent meaning maybe irossically implied. (Compare ‘We advanced’
and ‘We didn’t retreat’.) A word translated by a negative and its contrary term is not a
satisfactory equivalent, unless isis used ironically. (Compare ‘spendthrift’ and ‘not
stingy’.) A word translated by a negative and its contradictory term is a weakened
equivalent, but the force of she understatement mayconvryrquivalence: e.g. ‘false’ is
almost ‘not true’; ‘be agreed with that’ is almost ‘he didn’t dissent from it’. Lastly, a
word translated by a double negative and the same word or its synonym is occasionally
an effective translation, bus normally in a weakened form (e.g. ‘grateful’ maybe ‘not
ungrateful’, ‘not unappreciative’). A translator has to bear all the above options in
mind, in particular where the contrary, contradictory or converse term is plainly or
approximately missing in the target language, which should be his own.
Philosophy is a fundamental issue in translation theory. When Witlgenstein ‘abandoned
the idea that she structure of reality determines the structure of language, and
suggested that isis really the other way round’ (Pears, 1971), he implied that
translation was that much harder. His most often quoted remark, ‘For a large number
of cases—though not for all—in which we employ the word “meaning”, it can be
defined or explained thus “she meaning of a word is us use in the language”’
(Wittgenstein, 1956), is more pertinent so translation, whwh in the final consideration
is only concerned with contestual use, than to language av a system. Again, when
Austin (1963) made his revolutionary distinction between descriptive end prrfonnalive
sentences, be illusiruled a valuable coxtrasl between non-standardized and
standardized language which always interests a translator: foe a formulaic sentence
 The theory and the craft of translation 7

soch as ‘I name this ship Liberté’, theee is normally only one equc’alent in, say,

French,‘Jrbaptisec cani esousIcnomdeLiberié’,andthetranslatorhasno ptions uchaswo ldbeav ilableifthesentencehadread:‘IwishtheLiber’iéal suc es .Farther,Kant’sdistnctionbetwe nanalyticalpropositonswhicharclingsatic,e.g
‘All bachelors are asmarnied’, and synthetic referential propositions sach as ‘The
bachelor hid in the cupboard’, provided the rest of the passage clarifies the type of
cupbaardhrhidio,givcsthctcanslatormonclicmnce inhistrratmrniofanalYtical
prcome?’
opositions. Lasthave
ly, Drier’snothing
‘meaning moanstoindotention’with
helps thminding
e translator to seeorthrefusing
ai ‘Woald yoa miornd doicaning.
ng it?’ and ‘I reUsaally,
fuse to believe ita’ andtest’s
‘Woold yeaorcarae to
proposition’s intention can be ascertained only oaiside lbe atiorances, by mumming the reason and the occasion for lbeatir anco. ‘I’l murder yea if yoa do that again’
maybe a moiher exercising discipline. ‘Domain cost samedi’ may mean ‘Tomorrow,
the holidays begin’ (Seleskovitch, 1979).
Translation theory is not only an interdisciplinary study, ii is even a fanction of ihr
disciplines I have btirfly alluded to.

Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to roplace a written message and/or

statement in one language by the same message and/on statement in another
language. Each exercise involves some kind of loss of weaning, dun to a number of
factors. It provokes acontinaoustension, odialecric, an argawent basedon nbc claims
of each language. The basic loss is on a continuum between overteanslarion (increased
detail) and undentranslarion (increased generalization)
In the first place, if the text describes a situation which han elements peculiar to the
natural environment, instituli005 and culture of its language area, there is an
inevitable loss cf meaning, sioce the transference to, or rather the substitution or
replacement by (Huas, 19b2)—the word ‘translation’, like so many others, is
mmslnadiog, doe to its ctymology—ihc translator’s laagaage can only be approximair.
Unless there is already a rrcognized translation equivalent (bat will the reodnr be
familiar with it, and will he accept it?—here we most bear Prince’s pragmalics in
mind) the translator has to choose from transcribing rho foreign word (say, dii’ecmeui’
du eabinei), translating it (‘head of the minister’s office’), substituting a similar word
in his own culture (‘Permanent Undrrsrcrrtory of Siatr’), naturalioing the word
with a loan translation )‘dirrctor of the cabinot’), nomelimes adding or substiluting
soffiu from his own language (e.g. appar-aichik, Pragur, fooiballeur), delining it,
or, the last resort, paraphrasing (‘head of the Minister’s departmental staff’), which is
sometimes added in parrnrhesi or as a footnote tea transliteration. However, there
is no ‘referential’ loss if the situation is on ecutral, eon-national ground with
participants without specifically local fralurev (e.g. a mathematical siudy, n medical
experiment using standard equipment), i.e. if there is culiaral overlap
The secend, and inevitable sourer nI loss is thn fact that the two luoguagns, both in
their basic character (langue) and their seciul vurierirs (parole) (bearing in mind
Jukobson’s (1973) gloss on Saussure), in contest have different lexical, grammatical
8 Apprnarhrs to

andco edsy tems,andsegmentmanyphysicaloblectsandsteualyal conceptsdiflet nly.(tJsu ly,thecloset helanguageandthecult re,thecloserthetaeslatonandtheotignal.(Fernwords,pheasetosentencetcoet spondprecuely

on the lone fesical scoles which interest the translator (Newmark, 1969): (1) lormaltty
(cl Joos, 1967)and
(learn fe(4(ozen tesaluatson
o uninhihited(; (2( feelr(loot
ng at allecsohucales:
trvt y (learn overheatedrnoralrty
to deadpan); (3)(good
generality attoabstbad(;
eact on (learpleasora
n populot to opaqoel(nsce
y techosctoal(;
rosty(. rrferstty (sttargto wenkl: dsrnrnsion (e.g. wide to narrow((. I have proposed
rule rhot cotrcvpondsug words, collocatsors, rdroms, metaphors, proverbs.
saysr gs cyntactsc uoils and word-order must be equally frequent sn the approprsala
styla and register of the test) rn the source and the target language; bat the translator
car reset tallow thts tale to the letter, srnce it even has rnhereot contradrctsons.

Thsrdly, tha indssrduaf uses of language of the tent-writer and hr translator do nor
corocida Everybody has leuical if not gramrnatrcal idsosyncrasres, ard attaches
‘private’ meanings to a few words. The translator normally writes no style that comes
naturally to hrm. desirably with a certair elegance and sersstrvsty unless the test
precludes it. Morrover, as Werghrman (1947) has pointed out, a good wrsters use of
language ss otter remote from, loot at cross purposer wrth, some of the vaosertsaoaf
canons of go ad urrfisrg, and it is the writer not the canons that the trurslator most

Lastly, the tranvlator and the test-wrrter have dif0erent theatres of moaning ard
ditferert values The translator’s theory colours his interpretational the test. He may
set greater value than the test—writer on connotation and carrerportdirgly lesson
denotation. Hr may look for symbolism where realism was intended; for sesaral
meanings where only one was intended; Oar diggerert emphasis, based on his own
philosophy or even his reading of the syntas. The dill error values at writer and
translator nay be parodied through a rchoat.report, where words like: competent,
lair, average, adequate (cI. addquat(, above average, satrugarrery, passable, middlrng,
may mean all thingr to all men (ef. Trier, 1973). Thou diagrammatically one may vera
targrt language tent as an object in a magnetic, held which han resen or sight
conflicting to rats eserted upon it. The resulting loss of meaning is inrsitabtr and cv
unrelated, say, to the obscurity or the drgicirncies ng the test and the incompetence of
the trarulator, which are addrtional possible sources of this loss of meaning,
sometimes rrlerrrd to as ‘entropy’ (Vinay, 1968).

This, then, is the problem, and in the last 30 years, a considerable theoretical
titerature has been devotrd to if. A few professronal lrnguists, as well as translators,
began to turn their attrrtiou to franstation theory at a timr when phrlosophy was
substantially concerned with language and later when with th5 decline of Bloomfrvldian
or bet,aviourisf (rather than structurofrst) linguistics and rapid progress to applied
lrngurstrcv, semantics was brrng (grotesquely) ‘reinstated’ withrn linguistics. Prior to
this period, translation theory was almost enelasivrly the concern of turn of lettrr’r,
with the notable etceplion of Humboldt.
 The theory ard the craft of translation 9

The literature is dominated by Nida, chose cork is informed by bts expeetence as a

hngaist cod as a Bible-translator. In Nida (1964, 1969), almost evety ttanvlatton
problem is discus ed. He adapts transfotmatienal grammar by proposing eight medel kernel sentences as tranvt ional stages bets een soarer and target language stractaees.
Hediscusses
applies cotuponen halticanallogical
ysis by using cretatioss
ommon, dsagnost cofandneeds
supplementaryn4th
componenteach
s as teatsother,
toe comparingtheand coddfeneoce
ntrast ng stems wsthsn abet’eaeoo
semanttc t etd. He
eultarat and lirgurstic translation, the releeance of stisceurse anatysts. the difficulttes
of translating beteseen remote cultures, lesels ef usage. the psychologtcal connotations
of cords and practical problems of translation. His redaction of propostttons to

oblandects, etformal
’ents, relatsonalequivalence
s and abstracts may be merise too
lrurtful toheusily
translators as ameighted
comprehension procedur e than the kernel sentences. His distinetson betmeen dynamse
against the formal pnopenttes of
lueguage. Nida’s resect beaks (l974a and t975a) are specifically concerned tsith
semantic grammar and componential analysts, but they can be proktably applied to
the first stages of translation procedure. He has notably summariced the present state
of translalien theory (197db)

Fedoros (1958, 1968) stresses that teanslatton theory rs an independent lsnguistie

dtsctplinr, dretssng trum observations and presiding the basis tee practice Like the
Leipzig School, hr boliesrs that all esperiruce is translatable, and relects the eirss that
larguago expresses a peculiar mental nerd-picture. Homeser, the lack of a common
eutleok or ideology at present impairs the rlfrctit’enzxs of translation. Komissaros
(1973) sees translation theory moving in three directions the deretutise (information
translation), thr semantic (precise equisalence) and the transformational (transpositienofeelrrantsteuctuees(.Htstheeryofrquit’alencedssttngussheshseleeels
(1)
units, (2) collocations, (3) information, (4) the sttaatton, and (5) the commuotaim.
Jumpelt (1961) applies the Trire—Weisgerber field beers to technological
texts, and effectively distinguish es superetdinate and saberdinate tenms in the’
technical literature. The Leipzig Schoal (Neubeet, Kade, Wotjak, Jaget, Helbig,
Ruzickaf, much of whosr cork has been published in the periodical Fi’zmdapr’au’hzn.
in its six Beihrfre, and in Lingui.ttinchr Arbritnbet’iehte, distinguishes sharply brtmren
the insariant (cognitive) and the variant (pragmatic) elements in translation, and
turns transformational grammar and srmiotics to account. tt is sometimes short on
pnoeedures and examples, and restricts itsrlf to non-Istenany tests. Neubert’s und
Hrlbig’s arising has bern imaginatisr. Koller (1972) is particularly useful in distinguishing
information from communication, and Reiss (1971) has categorized and
illustrated the sarirty of trxt-typrs Catford (1965) han applied Hallrday’s xystemie
grammar to translation theory, and has fruitfully eatrgortzed translation shifts
brtmren Irvels, struclunrs, mend-classes, units (‘rank-shtfts’) and systems. Hr dishnguishes
botmorn ‘context’ (of situation) and ‘en-test’ (of language). He sets gneaten
limits to the pessibtltties of translation than other theortnts. Firth (1968) points to
contextual meaning an the basis of a translation theory and sees translation theory as
the basis of a nets theory of language and firmer foundations in philosophy. Moanin
(1955, 1964, 1967) dineassrx teannlation thoorizu and their relation to semantics and
supports the ‘linguistic’ against the literary theory of translation. Levy (1969) and
WinIer (1969) apply linguistics to hr translation of litrrary texts, including the
10 Approaches to translation

phonological aspects of penney. Wutlnenow (1969), Kfoepfer (1967) and Cony (1956)
reject all bat a literary appeoach to translatten theoey.
The above-mentioned liteeataee is basically theorettcal. Of the hterature nahnch
applies linguistics to translation procedures, Vinay and Darbelnel (1976) areoutslanding.
They enumerate seven proceduees—teanslileratson loan translation, bteral
teunslutien, ttarssposttion, modulation, equivalence, adaptation—and make perceptive
distinctions between Feench and English. Frtedenioh’s monk on English and

Oeeman (1969) is also invaluable, whilst Oerman and French have bees compared by Teulfaut (1968) and Malblanc (1961). Mention should also be made of Wandrasoka’s
(1969) multil ngual companisous and Fallen’s (1973) distinctions between French and English. Valuable essays are collected in Stung (1963), Brewer (1966), Smith (1958)
and Kapp (1974), whilst Oarvin (1955) includes nbc Prugue School’s contributions no
translation theory.

There is a considerable literature on machine translation (e.g. Boolh, 1967) but at

least since Bar-Hillel (1964) there is fairly general agreement that computers wrIl rot
hr much used Ian translation (nscept in restricted areas such as meteorology) in the
foreseeable future; they are already ol incalculable assistance to termsnolognsts so
compiling glossaries and bilingual dictionaries. Melfuk’s work on MT (e.g. in Booth,
t967) has thrown light on translation procedure.
0. Steiner (1975) contains a variety of outstanding literary translation and summaries
of translation theories, and emphasiaes the importance of translation as a key to ho
understanding of thought, meaning, language, communication and comparative
linguistics. He puts the case for ‘poem to poem’ against ‘plain prose’ translatious
(1966).

There is widr bat net universal agreement that the main aim of the translator is Ia
prodnce as nearly as possible the same eflect on his readers as wan produced on the
readers 0g the original (see Rim, 1953). The principle is variously referred to as the
principle of similar or equivalent response or rffrct, or ef functional or dynamic
(Nida) rqnivalrnce. It bypasses and suprrsrdes the nineteenth-century controversy
about whrlhrr a translation should incline towards lbe source on hr angel language,
and the consrqarnt faithful versus beaatiluf, literal versus free, form versus content
disputes. Tlsr principle demands a considerable imaginatise or intuitive effrct Item
thr translator, since he must net identify himself with the trader af the original, but
mast rmpathize with him, recognizing that he may have reactions and sympathies
alien to his own. The emphasis al thin principle in rightly on communication, on the
third term in the translation relalianship, on the reader (‘Who is the reader?’ is the
translation teacher’s lirst questson), wha had bren ignored previously, escept in Bible
translation. The translaten sheald produce a diffrrent fypr of translation of the same
lent br a diflerent rypr ol audience. The principle rmphosizrs the importance of the
psychological factor—it is mmntalintic—ilt nucoesa can hardly ho s’eribiod. One mould
want to know how each reader reacts—bow he thinks, beefs and behaves. The
principle allows for a wide range of translation stylrs: if the writer ob the original has
 The henry and the craft nf tearslatirn 11

deviated from the tanguage norms of the type of test he has written, whethet it san
dvertisement a report or a titeraey mock, one woutd expect the translation to do
tikewise. A poem or a story in such a ease woutd retain the flavour of the originat, and
might perhaps read tikeatranslation.

Whiacetst thsum
e successfceases
ul practitionerivhore
of oquivatecttheeffect effect
appears to becannot
achievmg sometbehireatioed.
ng tike the ceystatIfioataionnon-titerary
stated by Stendhat to betentthe essence of use, there
describes,
qualifies or makes use ot a peculiarity of the tanguage it is written in, the cruder 0f the
mitt have to have it euptained to him, untess it is so triviat that it can be
omitted. This appties say to Feoud’s stips of the tongue and ‘1okes’, where asimitar
communicative effect might be obtained by fresh euumptes, but where the source
tanguage esamptes mould stilt have to be retained. In fact, the sentence, ‘Er
behandelte mich wio seinesgleichen, ganz famitliondr’ (Freud, 1975) could be
translated as, ‘He teeated meas au equal, quite like a tamiltionaire’, but it has not the
naturalness of the German Similarly, in the case of Freud’s puns on unec-dotuge,
ulco-holidays, monument-arity, the German must be retained.
Secondly, a non.literary tent relating to an aspect 0f the culture fumitiar to the first
reader but nut to the target language reader is unlikely to prod ace equivalent effect:
particularly, if originally intended only for the first reader. The translator, therefore,
say, in translating the laws of a tourer-language eoautey, cannot ‘bend’ the test
towards lbe second reader.

Thirdly, there is the artistic work with a strong local flavour which may also be rooted
in a particular historical period. The themes will consist of comments on human
character ard behaviour—universals, applicable to the reader of the translation, and
therefore subject to the equivalent-effect principle. Gn the other hand, the work may
describe a culture remote from lbe second reader’s experience, which the trusslutor
wants to introduce to him not as the original reader, who took or takes it for granted,
but as something strange with its uwn special interest. In the case of the Bible, the
translator decides on equivalent-effect—the nearer he ear bring the human truth and
the centietatioun so she reader, she murr immediately hr is likely to transmit its
religious and moral message. But if the culture is as important us the message (the
translator has to decide), he reproduces the form and content of the original as
literally as possible (with some transliterations), without rrgued foe equivalent-effect.
IfHcmrr’s oirciy erorroc, the ‘wine-dark sea’, were to be translated as the ‘(sky) blue
sea’ merely to achieve eqaivalent-eflect, much would be test. As Matthew Arnold
(t92fl) painted out, one cannot achieve equivalent-effect in translating Homer as one
knows aething about his audiences.

Intact, if the creatise artist writes for his own relief (in Benjamin’s words, ‘No poem
is wrItten fur its reader, nor is regard for those who receive uwork of art useful for the
purpuse at understanding it’ (1923)), then the equivalent-effect principle is irrelevant
a the translation af a work of art; the translator’s luyatry into the artist, ard he must
cancerIrate on recreating as much of the work as he ear. This is literal or maximal
lranslattnn in Nabokov’ ssersr (i9b4), ‘rendering, us clusrly as the associative and
syntactical capacities of another language allows, the exact contextual meaning el the
nrtginat’. Syntax, word-order, rhythm, sound, all have semantic satnes. The prierities
12 Appntaehrs a

differ far each work, bat there are three rules of thumb: (a) the translation should he
as literal as possible and as tree as is necessary (Court, 1896). i.e. the unit at
trarstatian sheuld be as smell as possible )Haas, 1962): (b) a seater language ward
stranslated
heuld not normally beastransdark’
lated salebecause
a tanget language‘dark
ward whissch hasfsatrer-
anarhet primarary earduakrl:
-ta- ear equssestablished
alert in the saurce languagecallacatians
)tchwaia shauld natlikebe
easer Augra, ‘dark eyes’, are the rsceptsaa); (e) a ttuuslattau is impeameabla ta
snlenlatoner it nasru lakes osero typical touter laaauage callocatian, structure or
wasd-arder Tb ase roles apply to ‘literal’ as to the much mate common equtsalantetleet
translation. Interference. howeter plausible, is always mistrarslattaa The
European Com,worsttra Gloetost (1974) reads like a guide on how to asoed it
Paradasseally, the ‘literal’ principle of translating works of art is ‘scientific’ and
scrifiahlc, whilst the cquisalent-effect principle is intuitise. If the emphasis is an
human nature rathat than on local culture, a masterly translutian such as Strlaa
Grarge’s of Shakespeare or Baudelaire may conform to bath principles.

There are ufsa orbra testricted methods of translation: information ironslattetr.

ranging tram briaf abstracts through summaries to camplrta rapraductiar at content
mithaut farm; plain presr translation yas in Panfuinsy ra guide ana so the ariginal.
abase language should always bra little familiar; interlinrar trauslatiau, which shows
the mechanics af the original; farmal translation, for naasrnsr poetry (Margeastara)
and nursery rhymes, where the meaning and the scenaria, but nor the tone, can he
ignored; academic translation, tar carserring a test to a standard literary sisle: a
cumbinusian af trunslireaurian, uruaslaiian and puaaphaasr far tests concerned with
thrsuurce language, where the meraliagual (Jakabsan, 1960) function predominates.
Trunslatiua theory, hawrser, is not eancarard with restricted translation. Whilst
principles hare been, aud will be, peaposed far dealing with racurreat prahletrts
(‘truaslurian rules’), a general thraty cunnat propose a single marked (e.g. dynamic
rqaisaleace), bar must be concerned with ihe full range attest-types and tett
currrspanding iranslatiar criteria, as well as the mater cariables iaialtcd.

Many thaurists base disidad teats according to subject-matter (literature, institutions,

tachnalogy, etc.), bar ii is perhaps mare profitable to begin with Bühlar’s statement
(l93d) at hr functions at language which had a wide inflaraca an tha Prague Scheal
and has bran used by same translation theorists (Raiss, 1971; Harimuna and Vrraay.
1970). (Figurr 1 is an rstrndrd sarsian.)

In this sehrmr, the aaprrssisr tunction A is author-centred, the personal use the
usrirrr makes at his language; function B is the esraulsaguisric’ tatoamurian content at
the teat; functiaa C is rrader-crarrrd (for this Buhlerased thr inadequate ward
.4pprll: hr afsu usad ‘signal’. a bettra term). In culling it thr ‘sacatisa’ fanctuan I
include all thr rasaurcas with which the writer affrcts thr rrudrr, at particular the
ematise, so that hr ‘fats the message’.
 The theory end the staff of ttanslation 13

L __ _
Looking at the text from the translator’s angle, I adapt Frege’x (1960) distinctions
(Fig. 2(. The translator workx on Ies’el s.’, which is the language of the text. He has two
parallel sources of reference and companison: X5 ix the xituatioo in the neal world, or
its redection ix the text-writer’s mind, when he (the translator) steps aside from the
text, and asks himself: Now what is actoally happeniog? Who is this? Where is this?
Cant name it? Is this true?, etc. Xa is the logical sfrucforo of the uoderlying claoses,
the clauses in their simple onclattrned fotm, desirably with an animate subject and an
inanimate object, and which may later hare to be converted to corresponding
syntactic sttuctuees in the target language. Level Z is the ‘internal image . .
properly, differences in translation should only be at this level’ (Frege).

Thus, forapartofatextY,lePtéoidentdelaRepublique, X1,maybeValéryGiscard

d’Estaing, while Xa is perhaps ‘The mao who prrsidos over the Republic’. Level Z
may suggest any subjectively coloured figure of aathoriey, but us this is standardized
language (seep. 16), it does not obtrude upon the frunslation (‘the French President’).
14 Approaches to translation

In Fig. 3 the scheme is simplified.

The translator has an insteument consisting of Sheet tenets XYZ—compare the tabes
of a jointed tetescope. With it he oh scenes a test which exhibits the three functions of
tanguage ABC in varying degreen. He may have to deflect his instrument, which may
hr tocused mainty at A fos a poem, at B for a technical trport, or C for an
advertisement, hot sometimesresis briwern A and B foe a desceiption of notate in the
poem, or betwren B and C for the final recommendations of a report, as no test, and
few sentrncen are or dilated A or B or C. Evrn names like ‘Johnny’ or ‘Petrushka’
may br C as welt an B. Whilst the transtator always works from X, hr continuously
checks Y against X. Level Z, the partly conscious and partly unconscious rlemrnt
corresponding to the test writrr’s A, is always prrsent, but the translator has to
rrduce its influrnce to a minimum, until he is lrft with ‘chat opprars to him to hr an
almost gratuitouschoicr hrtweenequally vatid unitsof language, which may betrxical
orgrammaticat; this then becomes a question ofstylistics, and his cersion on this level
of quoi homines, ion senienniae may be as good as ten others. A difference between
literacy and nonliterary translation is also clarified by the diagram. tn non-litreary
transtation, the informative function B, which is identical with the teanstatoe’s
referential X, is real; in the case of a realisticliterary text, the function B is also treated
fuctuully,husr’centhrdrsailshcuetypiculundgrnrtatimplicusions. tnanywoekotart
of moral seriousness, the rrferrntiul tunction is a commrnt on humus bekuviour and
character and atl passages are implicitly metaphoricat and altegorical; whatever the
content--abstract, symbolical, naturatistic—thr rspressive function A is most important
in the test, and inevitably thr translator’s level Z is more influential than in other
types of text.

Figure 4 shows tentatively how the three functions may affect the work of the

Att tents have an informative function, und the examples (I) mesely illuxitute she
main emphasis. Style (2) for A is assrssed by the translator according So its
grammaticat and lexicat deviations from ordinary language; for B one would expect
the appropriate register; whitst for C, wbrre examples arr sharpty divided betwern
 The thenrrJan gfeiift uf.BarslOtinn 15

official writing (laws and notices) and pabltcity ggpqggpaa, styiev’ar correspondingly
formulaic or peesaasive In asctentrfic ry’pffttffT”Wt,1IId’derab1e
use of the third person, past troses (present tensesin French), malts-noon compounds,

pas ives.Fornotices,gram aticaldisetgrncirsineachlangunge‘Wetpaint’becomes‘Freshlypainted’inGermanand‘Mindthepaint’inFrench,‘Bewareofthedog’is‘Bitngdog’inGermanand‘Wicked og’inFrenchTheunitoftranslation(6)

is always as small as possible and as large as is necessary (grammatically iris usually
the group or phrase), but an advertiser is likely to ignore it, whilst a literary translatot
mayt tyrobeir gitdowntothewoed.Thrmotethetesttisrstlteresoutces language, and theregore the more important its gorm, the greater the losses srI
meaning (8); the greatest loss is in poetry, since it uses all resources oglanguage. (‘The
poetry is the untranslatable element’, Robert Frost said.) A technical translator has
no eight to create neotogisms (9), unless hr is a mrmbet of an iniretingual glossary
team, whilll an advertiser or propaganda writ er can use any linguistic resources he
requires. Conventional metaphors and sayings (10) should always becorsentionally
translated (lbe convenlion is shown in the dictionary), but unusual metaphors and
comparisons should be reduced to their sense if the test has a mainly inlormaiivr
lunclion (11). The appropriale equivalents for keywords (10) should be scrupulously
repealed throughout a test in a philosophical lest; theme words are the writer’s main
concepts and terms of art; is literary works, the stylistic markers are likely to be an
author’s characteristic words (Thomas Mann’s cerrvorferr, murbe, abnuizbar-,
hberr’eiztin Death in Venice or his leitwoliss, ‘she gypsy in the green wagon’ and ‘the
lair and blue-eyed ones’ in Tonie Kr’dger’); in an advertisement for wine, they maybe
the token-words, i.e. moro-rémoino (Mature, 1953), that are transferred to evoke a
fact of civilization too snobbish lobe translated: cucée, chdteau, grander-u, appellation
contr’ôlée. In a non-literary text, there is a case for transcribing as well as translating
any key-word of linguistic significaner, e.g. Hitler’s favourite political words in
Maser’s biography.
16 Appruonhos tn

Jakobnon (1960) has added the metalinguol, the phattc and the aesthetic to Boblet’s
language functions, and Fig. 4 could he espanded to include them.

All texts may be regarded by the translator as an amalgam of srandardteed and nan-ntandaedtaed language. The distinction between them is that for siandandteed
longuage, when it is used us such (but technical teemu olten welt into oedinaey
lperson,
anguage—e.g. fand
ail-sole’,that
‘parametiser’)the
, there nhoul‘science’
d be only oneofconnecttranslation.
equixalenl, peoxidWhilst
ed one enutsfor, peoi’uon-standardieed
ided it is uued in the name situationslanguage,
by the name hind ot
of whateser length, ihese is sanely only one correct equisulrut, and that is the ant or
cratt 01 translation.

Standardized fanguage consists portly ol terminology, and as Bachraeh (1974) has

stated, increased research and teaching is required here. The terms need atlaching to
pictures and diagramt (the Duden principle—processes unwell at oblects), collecting
in lesicat firtds, us in a thesaurus, as well as in cognate groups, with frequency,
tormatity etc., indicated. Whilst many terms are internationalisms, others, as Maillot
(1969) has painted out, are pulysemout. Réoioruni’e means ‘renistor’ as well as
‘resistance’ r’éacteur ‘reststancr’ and ‘reactor’, capacité ‘capacitance’ and ‘capacity’.
Larbaud (1946) stated that a translator must look up exeny word especially the ones
he knows best. Preferably, words should be looked up only 10 confirm knowledge,
and rxrry timr one consults a bilingual dictionary the word should hr chrckrd in
hull-a-dozrn snurce and targrt language monolingual dictionaries and reference
books. Any target language word found in a bilingual, but nor in a monolingual,
dictionary must be rejected. Bilingualdictionunirs nttrn hose obsolete, rare or one-off
words insenlrd through interference.

Howecer, standardized language goes beyond technical terms. Ii includes any

commonly usrd metaphor, idiom, peoseeb, public notice, social phcasc, esplclise, the
usual ways of staring the date or time of day, gicing dimensions, perfoemarixes
espressed in accepted formulae. Thus one would esprct only one ealid translation foe
‘Keep Britain tidy’, ‘One man’s meat is another’s poison’, ‘cent an con’ and for phuhe
phrases such as ‘Nice weather we’re haxing’. Tb crc sheald be little choice in
translating lbr restricted patter in the specialized uses of language mentioned in
Hulliday (1973)—weather reports, recipes, the language of games, unwell as company
reports and accounts, the format of agendas and minutes, medical tcpocts. The stale
language within each peer-group, the modish words instantly intennationalteed by the
media, the prrdienable puller, the fill-in between stimulus and response—all often
hone their equally predictable eqoiealeuts in the detritus of the target language. The
translator’s insariant trems include not only the technical and scientific which maybe
supranational and the institutional, cultural and ecological which maybe national, but
also the characteristic espressions within a register, e.g. a patient’s ‘admission’
or ‘discharge’ (dimiontone) from hospital; thr referring terms noted by
Strawson (l97fJa) as ‘quaint names, substantial phrases which grow capital letters’
such as the ‘Great War’, ‘The Annunciation’, names of organizations and companies,
 The theory and the craft of trarslatiur 17

titles of books, pictures, etc., which are trunsceihed unless Sheen ts already a generally
accepted teanslation, which must then be used; quotut ons teem authoetoed teunsla’ lions which must be used and acknowledged; the argon and ‘tn’ weeds that cluster
rincrease
ound suciul geoupsandandcongeal
occuputions (‘Wthee cul iueea
t “st ni” andand“snap—what do you cul it?’). Inevitably oegunioution, bureuuceucy, technology, the media continuously
estent of standardioed language.

Which leases nonstundandieed lunguage, language cerutively used, whtch is how

language it daily used by everyone. Herr, trunslution becomes u craft and un ant—or
simply ant—where three are limited choices. Here, too, the sctentiftc method
operates, since the sense

lseen
anguage agaiusnstnatural
the original, undlanguage
vice versa, us welacceptably
l us against the refereused
nce, so thatincleartheerrorscontest,
of lunguuge andiffactitarise elsoiminutined. Furthether,original.
the translation hasTheto be
translator’s craft lies first in his command of anesceptionully large vocabulary us well
us alt syntactic resources—his ability to use them elegantly, gesibly, succinctly. All
translation problems finally resolr’r themselves into problems of how to write well in
the target language. Benjamin (1923) slated that in a good work, language surrounds
the content as a shell surrounds its fruit, whilst a translation isa coat hanging loosely
round the content 0f the original in large folds. A translation is never finished, and
ore haste keep paring away at it, reducing the element of paraphrase, tightening the
langaage. The sheeter the teunslutioe, the better it is likely to be.
Secondly, the teunxlatoe as craftsman haste know the foreign language so well that hr
can determine to what estent the text deviates from the language norms usually used
in that topic on that occasion. He has to determine with an intuition bucked by
empirical knowledge the extent of the text’s grammatical and semantic oddness,
which he must account for in a wellweitten ‘expressive’ test, and may decide to
normalize in a badly written ‘infoemative’ oe ‘vocative’ tent. Moreover, he requires a
degree of creative tension between fantasy and common sense. He has the luntasy toe
making hypotheses about appaeently unintelligible passages, and the common sense
toe dismissing any unrealistic hypothesis—it is pointless to pursue an idea (unlike an
ideal) that conner be reel or realized. More practically, hr needs the common sense
foe eliminating inlerfeeence and spotting strange acronyms. (What are K opérutoireo
hut car operaraireo?)

The rennslatoe has to acquire the technique of transfereing smoothly between the two
basic teanslation processes: comprehension, which may involve interpretation, and
formulation, which may involve eeceeatinn (Fig. 5).
Hr has to hove a sharp eye for oppositions, contrasts and emphases (foregrounding,
see Garvsn, 1955) in the original, and, ifit isa xonliteeaey test, he has to know how to
accentuate these in his own version. He has to distinguish synonyms used to give
additional or complementary information from synonyms used simply to refer to
previously mentioned object or concept. In literary translation (see Nielesche, 1962)
his hardest task is to catch the pace of the original.
 App h h dhfhfth I d d f
excellence can be deteemined only through the informed discussion of ospeets or
exceptionally intellifent laymen; no popnlae acclaim can stamp the valor of
translation any more than eta cane era new piece of manic. After mistakes have been
‘proved’ by reference to encyclopaedias and dictionaries, expects have to rely on them
intuition and taste in preferring one of two or three good translations of a sentence or
paragraph. Their final choice at this level is as subjective as the translator’s choice of
words, but they mast hr ready to give reasons for their choice. The main mallets
under dispute nay be whether the translator has understood the tone, the writer’s
uttitude towards the information presented, which is often indicated in the syntas—’
say, the use of modal verb forms, subjanctiret—rather than the words.
Further, the experts, the third readers, hose to decide intuitively whether the test
natural (‘Would one actaally see that on the printed page?’), with the proviso that
they first ugree what kind of printed page they are talking aboat. In the case of
‘expressive’ writing the criterion is: ‘Would he write that?’

Goethe (1813) stated that translation is impossible, essential and important. The
words of all languages oserlap and leave gaps ol meaning: there are unnamed, and
perhups unnumable, parts of a hand or a cloud. Benjamin (1923) stated that
trunslution goes beyond enriching the lunguage and culture of a country which it
contributes to, beyond renewing and maturing the life of the original test, beyond
expressing and analysing the most intimate relationships of languages with each other
und becomes a way of entry into a universal language. Words that according to the
consrutioual wisdom are prculiae to national character (say, skhes’o foe Russian,
magari for Italian, hinsehmes for German, sympathique for French, ochlampig foe
Austrian German (mary more come to mind)) may perhaps fill in the gaps in genreal
and universal experience, which will remain.
2. What translation theory is about

Translation theory is a misnomer, a blanket term, a possible translatton, therefore a

translation label, for Ubersetztarrgoa’isoenochufr. In fact teanstatton theory ts nerther a
theory nor a science, bat the body of knowledge that we hare and hare stttl to hare
abont the process of translutinf: it is therefore an -otofy, bat I prefer not to catt
‘translatology’ (Harris, 1977) or ‘tradactolofy’ (Vasqnez, 1977), becunse the terms
soand too pretentions—I do notwishto add to any -Olofirs or -tsms. Brsrdes, trace, as
Gombrich (1978) has pointed ant, Knn.rtn’iasenschaft translates ‘art theory’, ‘transtation
theory’ will do.

Translation theory’s main concern isle detennine appropriate translation methods for
the widest possible range of tests or test-categories. Farther, it provides a framework
of principles, restricted mIen and hints fortranslatinf tents and ceiticizinf translations,
a background for problem-solving. Thns, an institational term (‘MP’) or a metaphor
(‘the stone died’ (see Levin, 1977)) or synonyms in collocation or metalinfual terms
may each be translated in many ways, if it is ant of content; in these areas, the theory
demonstrates the possible translation procedures and the variant arfuments for and
ufuinst the use of one translation rather than another in a particalar context. Note
that translation theory is concerned with choices and decisions, not with the
mechanics of either the soarer language (SL) or the target langaage (TL). When
Catford (19651 given a list of words that are grammatically singular in one laagaagr
and plural in another, he may be helping the stadent to translate, he ix illustrating
contrastive lingaistics, but he is not contribating to translation theory.

Lastly, translation theory attempts to give some tnsight into the relation between
thoaght, meaning and language; the aniveesal, cultaeal and individual aspects of
langaage and behavioar, the understanding of caltares; the interpretation of texts that
may be clarified and even supplemented by way of translation.

Than translation threey covers a mide range of pursuits, attempts always to be useful,
tn ansist the individaal translator both by stimulating him to write better and tn
saggest paints of agreement on common trantlution problems. Assumptions and
prapnsirinns about translation normally anise nnly from practice, and should not be
offered mithout examples of originals and their translations. As with much literature
thèae, the examples are often more interexting than the thesis itself. Further,
translation theory alternates between the smallest detail, the significance (translation)
at dashes and hyphens, and the mast abstract themes, the symbolic power of a
metaphor or the interpretation of a multivalent myth.
19
20 Approaches to

Considertheproblem:atext obeseanslatedislikeaparticletoanel cteictedateactedbytheop osingfoec xofthetwocnlturesandthenoemsoftwolanga ges,theidotyo eaxiexof newriter(whomayinfeingeal thenoemsofhtsownlanguage),

and the different requirements of its readers, the prejudices of the translator and
possibly of its publisher. Further, the tent is at the mercy ala translatoe who may be
deficient in ses’eeal essential qualifications: aocueacy, resourcelulness, flextbtlity,
elegance and sensitivity in the use of his own language, which may sate him from
failings in two ash er respects: knowledge of the test’s subject matter and knowlodge
of tho SL.

Let us took first at the practical problems. The translator’s first task is to understand
the text, often to analyse, or at least make some generalizations about his text before
he selects an appropriate translation method, suit is the business of translation theory
to suggest some criteria and priorities for this analysis.
First, the intention of a toot. An article on ‘Personnel management of multinational
companies’ may really be a defence of multinational companies, written in innocuous
internationalese, with contrasting format to informal sent mccx emphasizing innocence:
‘prohlfime stop complete pour flee abordé globalement critique qui a
tendance a elf acer nuances et details et na done presque plus rico a s’oir as’ec la
rrialité.’ The defensive style speaks for itself.
Phrases such as these show that the writer is concealing his propaganda purpose
behind a mass of statistics and facts about multinational companies. The translator,
who has so be faithful to the author and not to his own view of multinational
companies, has to beae the intention of the original in mind throughout his work.

Or again, note the two more or less equivalent versions of a Chinese test quoted by
Achilles Fang (in Weight, 1976): ‘You maysay that they didn’t go the right way about
their business, but you must know that it in equally the fault of the times’ and ‘You
may blame them lot their misguided intelligence, yet you will have to agree with me
that their obscurity was due to a lack of opportunity’.
Fang comments that the point, which is the first thing the translator is concerned with,
comes out more clearly (?) in the second sentence (which might be clarified as ‘they
remained obscure as they had no chance of shining’).
Secondly, the intention of the translator-. Is he trying to ensure that the translation has
the same emotional and persuasive charge as the original, and affects the reader in the
same way as the original? Or is he trying to convey the cultural flavour of the SL test,
a combination of idiosyncratic language and untranslated regional terms? Or is he
addressing a different uninformed reader, who has to have the IL trst made more
esplicit and any cultural or institutional term esplained? (cI. Neubrrt, 1961).
Thirdly, the reader asd the netting of the trot. The translator asks himself: Who is the
reader? What education, class, age, sex? Informed or ignorant, layman or expert?
Where would the test be bond, viz, what is the TL equivalent of the IL periodical,
 What translation theory is about 21

newspaper, testbook, etc.? All this would help the teunslutoe to decide on the degree
of formality (of icialese, udministealive, formal, iuformul, col oquial, slang), emotive- ness (intense, warm, neutral, cool, impassive, factual) and simplicity (univeesalty
compehnsiblr,medialev ,geadutelve,fairlytechnial,technial,opaquelytchnial)hrmustpues whenheworksonthelst.Hefindsitusefl,moe vre,todistnguishbetwents tha re‘dramtic’oenar tive(‘ eb’ mphasi)andthosetha re‘staic’ordsceiptve(nous,no -compounds,adlectivrs,adverbs).
Fourthly, the quality of the o’titing and the authotiey of the text. If the test is
welsabject,thetranslatorhastoeefardevreyOuaOce
l svrit eo (i.e. the manner is as important as the matter, and all the words a vital component ofoftheauthoe’smraning(parttcularly,
the ideas), and/or if the SL writer is an acknowledged authority an his
if it is subtle and difficult) as having precedence over the response of the
reader—assuming that the reader is not required to act or react promptly. And again,
iftheSLtestisentirrlyboundopwiththrcultureoftheSLcommuoiiy—anOveloea
historical piece or a description attempting to characterize a place or custom or local
character—the translator has to decide whether or not the reader requires, or is
entitled to, supplementary information aud ruplanation.
In any event, the author scoots to ‘communicate’ but not at any price.
Before deciding on his translation method, the translator may assign his test to the
three genreal categories previously mentioned, each of which is dominated by
particular function of language. The most satisfactory basis here is Jakobson’s (1960)
modification of Buhler (1934): the main functions of language are lbr espectsive (the
subjoctivr or ‘I’ form), the descriptive or informative (the ‘it’ 10cm) and the vocative
at directive at persuasive (the ‘you’ form), the minor functions being the phatic, the
nteialingual and the aesthetic. All tests have aspects of the espressive, the informative
and the vocative function: the sentence ‘I (ave yoa’ tells you something about the
transmitter of the utterance, the depth of his feelings and his manner of expressing
himself; ii gives you apiece of siraifhl information; and ii illustrates the means he is
using to produce a certain effect (action, emotion, reflection) upon his reader. That
poetical ar nenteuce, which also illustrates the most logical, common, and neutral
sequence of arguments, viz. SVO, more particularly, unimale subjrct—serb—inanimate
object (the object of a sentence is ‘inanimate’, whethee ii be a person or a thing,
because it has a passive role), with no emphasis on auy of the three cumpooeuts, must
be translated literally, since literal translation is always best provided ii has the same
communicative and semantic effect.

Very approximately, the translation theorist can ant ifs such trst-catefories asterioas
literature (belles-letters), authoritative statements (speeches or declarations) and
personal or intimate writing to the espressive function; journalism, reportinf,
scientific and technical papres, genenal tesibooks, most non-literary work where the
facts are more important than the style, to the infoemaljvr function; and adveetisinf,
propaganda, polemical woeks (‘thesis literature’), popular litreature (Tnixialliteiatui,
best settees)—all these, to peiouude the reader—plus notices, insiractions, ealea and
regulations—these to direct the reader—to the vocuiice funclion. The translation
theorist then applies the following criteria to the translation of each test category:
language bias (SL or TL); focus (author, reader or ‘content’, extra-linguistic reality);
22 Approaches to translation

type of language (f’sgueative, factual or persuasive); unit of translation, which is always as short as possible, us long as is neces ary (Haas, 1962) (word, col ocation/group,
clause sentence, paragraph, text); loss of mraniflf (large, small, oil); treatment of

stock roeifnalmetaphors,andofrecntoradhocneolgism;lengthinrelationt heorifnal,whic depndsonthelanfuaesconernd(Germanisone-thirdlonferthanEflish;EnflishxlongerthanLatin)aswelasthelanguaefunction;puroseoftransltion(tocnviceort iuferm);lefitmacyofimpron’irgontheorifnat;

treatment of theme words (main concepts) and tokenwards (words that illustrate the
scene of iho tent). Three may well brother criteria. On the basis of these criteria the
theorist decides whether to translate ‘communicatively’ or ‘semantically’.

The minor functions of language are diverse. The translator a concerned only with
phutic language where phrases such as ‘of course’, ‘naturally’, ‘as is well known’
‘to befranke’, ‘so so speak’, ‘it nerd hardly be mentioned’, ‘it is worth noting’,
‘interesting to note’, ‘important’, etc. (usually ‘it’ is not so)—Orrman has many mere
(ju, ohm, geu’iuo, ssw>.—are used to keep the reader happy or in touch. The
ntetalingual function ol language has peculiar problems (see Chapter 5) when
non-institutional words accused (e.g. ‘ergative’, ‘optatin’r’, or deliberately polyxem’
ous expressions, words used in special sense or alternative espressions) and language
describing the SL or exemplifying its properties, which do not exist in the TL—and
nay have to be transferred or monosemized in the TI. translation. The aesthetic
function, where ihe words and or their sound-effects are more important than heir
meaning, cavern ‘pare’ poetry, a tot of nonsense rhymes and children’s poetry. The
translator may decide to ignore meanings and reproduce sound-effects. This function
is also intimately connrcted, but not, in my view, identical with the expressive
function. In any purportedly ‘art for art’s sake’, ‘significant form’ or ‘abstract’ work,
the translator has to weigh the claims ol ‘meaning’ against ‘form’. In my own view, all
‘abstract’ work or art has a meaning (albeit general and usually emotive) which is
sometimes more powerful than any of the more conventional versions of meaning,
and one has to make sense of an ‘abstraction’ (say, Mallarme’s Un coup do deo or a
Mondriun), if one is to appreciate it.

The theorist’s main concern, then, ix to select an appropriate general method of

translation, always bearing in mind thai ‘standardized language’, viz, technical teems,
terms of art, formulae, the set language of institutions, procedures, games, phatic
language, etc., mast be translated by the equivalent TL standaed teem, if one en/xis.
bane proposed only two methods of translation that ace appropriate to any text: (a)
communicabce translation, where the translator attempts to produce the same effect
no the TL readers ax was produced by the original on the SI. readers, and (b)semansic
translation, wheer the translator attempts, within the bare syntactic and semantic
vunstcutnts of the TI., to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the author. Alt
ether teanstutson method snerve specs ‘at purposes: interlinear, litreal (lesivally contest.
tree); information (facts only); service (from the translutee’s language of habitual
use); plain prose (as a bridge to the oeiginat). Tbe concepts of communicative and
semuntic translation are based on a narrowing 0f the ancient and old distinction
 What translation theory is about 23

between ‘free’ and ‘literal’ translation; with the proviso thai the Iwo methods may
overlap in whole or in part within a text, provided that the text is virtually voiiarc-Ircc
and is efficiently writ en; and on the assumption that tn both methods, the translator must scrupulously turn his attention both to the ideas and the words and their
arrangement (syntax and stres ) betore he operates his techniques and undertakes ‘compromises’ (e.g. overteanslating; underteaoslating, by giving les detail than the
oniginut; compensating foe semantic toss by replacing, say, a metaphor a one place with another in another part of the same sentence or paragraph).
Inevitably, most texts, particularly those rich in metaphor and polysemy (which
cannot be udoqoately compensated), will be raiher clearer, simpler and ‘poorer’ in
teanslation, and will serve ax one (of several possible) interpretations of the original.
Many readers, foe instance, who find German philosophcen sorb as Kant or Hegel
difficult, will find them easier in French or English.
The basic difference between communicative and semantic language is lbe sIrens on
‘message’ and ‘meaning’; ‘reader’ and ‘aoihor’, ‘utterance’ and ‘ihooght’ptocrsses’;
‘like’ or ‘as—and ‘how’; ‘peeformative’ and ‘constative’, but this is a mutter of
difference in emphasis rather than kind.

The teanslaiion theorist is concerned from start to finish with meaning. He is,
however, not concerned with the theoretical problems and sololions of semantics,
linguistics, logic and philosophy, hot only with theie applications in as far as thry can
help the translaror solve his problems.
First, the translator most assess whether the whole or a purl of the text ix ‘straight’
(means what it says), ironical (slightly or entirely oppositr in meaning), or
cal. TheSLuseofinvertedcommas(e.g. Die Wclr’s”DDR”)willaxsisrhim,ifthey
exist; hot irony often remains intended but not understood, or unintended but
imagined.
Secondly, the theorist has to decide which of the countless vanielieu of genre at
meaning he has to take account of. In my opinion, these are the linguistic, the
teferential, the subjective, the ‘force’ or ‘intention’ of the utterance, the ‘porforma’
live’, the inferential, the cultural, the code meaning, the e0000iutivo, the pragmatic
and the semiotic. I illustrate:

Test extract: ‘Mon ami la embeasxée duos Ic hull do l’hdtol.’

Linguistic: ‘My friend kissed hen in the hotel hull.’
(Note that a translation is the only direct statement of linguistic
meaning. To render linguistic meaning within the same language, oxe
has recaurue to convolutions sorb us ‘The man I like (and who likes
me) and have known for some time embraced the woman in the public
room in the front of the large house xheee people pay to stay’ or
‘synonymy’ such as ‘My mate kissed her in the front room of the inn’.)
Referential: Jean Dubois kissed Mrs. Veronica Smith in the ball of the Grand
Hotel, Dijon, at 3 pm on 5 January 1979.
24 Approaches to translation

(Ami, 1’ aod hotel are referential synonyms, and may hate to he

replaced io the translation to avoid ambrgutty on clumsy eepetttron).
Intention: Possibly, to shots that JD aod VS ate close frtends. (Intentton can
ooemafly ooly be determitted by tire contest of the extract.)
Perfortoatise: JD kissed VS to declare his lose for her. (‘Peefoemattve’ meantog is
(perhapt) here distinguished from ao illocutiooary statement such as ‘tt’s getting
dark, isn’t it?’ meooiog ‘Why don’t you pot the ltght on?)
Sablectivo: My personal bête noire kissed her to the hotel hall.
(perhaps)
lofereotiat: ‘My feieod’ oat ‘t’, etc.,
‘Her’, not ‘him’, etc.,
‘In the half’, not ‘the dining room’, etc.
Cultural: ‘Embtasoée’ signifies a casaat greeting only. L’hdtel na large mansion,
hotel, salesroom, etc.
Code: JD indicated to VS that she shonld go ahead. (This refers to the action.
(perhaps) not she sentence.)
Connotative: JD’s boldness, audacity or impertinence. (Conootative meaning is
more or less potential, and is not obt’ioas here. Descripttve words liko
jauoe, lion, préoeoce, farfefu, etc., hate more obvious connotative
meaning, which may be aniversal as well as caltunal 00 sahjectivc.)
Semiotic: This is the complete contestual meaning of the test esteact, taking
account of all the varieties of meaning mentioned above, as mellon the
‘pragmatic’ meaning which may render any component of the ott
prculiarly significant to the reader or to the social, regional. on
political group of readers addressed. In this case, the word hotel may
(it is unlikely) rouse hostile, pejorative or attractive feelings in the
readers, which the translator may have to account for.

Allvarielirs of meaning mayor may not assist the translator. He is alma ys expected to
know the referential (‘encyclopaedic’) as well as the linguistic (‘dictionary’) meanings,
whether he makes use of them or not. Whatever the test, and panticalarly if it
institutional, scientific or technological, he must understand the principal terms
(objects, devices, laws, etc.) insolsed, and briefly verify the definitions of peripheral

For the translation theoeist, the oh verses ides of the varieties of meaning, which arc
all interrelated (Fioth defined meaning as a ‘network of relations’), are the vanioas
categories of obscarily and ambigaity in the SL test with which he is concerned. Thas
on the first most genre at point, ‘Er ist rio feiner Keel!’ may mean ‘Ho is a decent
bloke’ or ‘He’s not a decent bloke’ or ‘Hr’s a questionable bloke’.
Lsnguittic obscurity maybe grammatical or Irsicaf: grammatical ambiguity may tcnd
to hr corfiord to one language, as in ‘Conaidet’isg his weukoess, he decided not to
take the test’ or to be virtually universal, us in lr licr’e de Jean (most common
prepostttons have multrple functions in mms languages), on fairly widespread. ‘lIt xc
 What translation theory is about 25

félicitdrent de ce suc ès ‘ Note also the teodeocy fee most geammars cot to indicate whether ao action is deliberate or ios’oluntary, as to ‘She obscured my s’ision’. Lexical
ambiguity way be due to polysemy, ‘The painting is nice!’ or to homonymy, ‘He
citrosmeann
ed the pole’. to aexpanding
l cases of linguistic ambitheguity, theoriginal;
irauslaioe has to bileat itin miisnd thnot
at he am(the
biguity madecision
y be deliberate, in whisichhis(,
case it is hheis oh tonormally
reproduce it, er’eoig
diallsambilineguatesmetaphor
according to the situatisionalpolysemous,
or the linguistic contest, appendi ng the les likely meaning it there is the slightest possibil ty of it bring the cor rci one. Note that
and has an element 0g ambiguity at its periphery;
therefore, ig a translator is unable to reproduce the metaphorical element in, say,
coudoyer’ Iso gent (for English, ‘rub shoulders with’, ‘mix with’(, he may, in another
TL, han’e to decide on the degree 0g gamiliariry, frequency, men rudeness to add as
the secondary component of his componential analysis of the phrase.
Referential ambiguity, which is often due to erratic use of deictics or poor technical
writing, is asually best cleared ap by consulting the macrocontesi or the ‘encyclopaedia’,
respectisely.

The performatis’e, intentional, inferential and connotaiional meaning of tests may all
be ambiguous, but here the translator has su resoarce except to reconsider the
linguistic and situational contest.
Hemmer, instances tf cultural and pragmatic ambiguity may be the most difficult of
all, in cases of fluctuating customs and attitudes respectir’ely, since the lest itself may
gino little clue to the meaning. I take ‘cultural’ meaning to refer to a SL community’s
customs, and here the ‘moaning’ of a meal, a kiss, a gesture, a drink, etc., may be
ambiguous unless the translator has a deep knowledge of the community’s social
habils, including those relating to class, sex, occupation, region, etc. Secondly, if
pragmatic meaning is taken to refer primarily to ihr SL community’s attitudes and
idrology, words like par’teilich and for’tnohs’irtlich, statements like ‘Was des Volkes
Hhndr schaffen, ist des Volkrsrigmn’ (in particular, the word Volk( cannot be
intrrprrtrd through the linguistic or situational conirsi, but only through an understanding
0f she GDR’s prrn’ailing political philosophy.
In literary texts, lexical ambiguities, particularly for theme-words, can sometimes be
clrarrd up by consulting the author’s other works—here the compuler’s assistance
mish ihr incrrusiug number of concordances comrs into us own. Further, a study of
symbols, rites, taboos, etc., has to be made to dixambiguate anthropological tests.

The translator basing to handle grammar and emphasis often notes a tension between
a natural (unmarked( and as ‘emphatic’ (marked( construction, often er’ideoced by
different word order which he has to

Meinen Freund hat en begrullt!

He actually greeted myfr’ieod!
Er hat mninen Errand begrOfli.
Hr grrrlrd my friend.
26 Approaches to translation

He has to interpret grammatical meaning, both on a general les’eI, and in refatton to

the distinction betssren SL and TL constructions.

Geammatical meaning is mare significant (the ‘tone’ or ‘flas’our’ of the text, its
primacy aspect, is peehapx dictated by its syntax), tess peecise, mote general and
sometimes more elusive than lexical meaning. tt can sometimes be sdrntsfied at tent
(a comedy, a dialectical argument, a farce, a dialogue, a nooses, a batlad, a
format agenda, the minutes of a meeting, etc., viz, the accepted term for a formal
utterance) or at paragraph tenet (a declaration as thesis, antithests or synthesis,
follon’ed by too or three supporting statements). But more commonly, grammatical
meaning is identified only as (a) a sentence, sshich may boo declaration so the form of
a (rhetorical) question, an order, a n’ish or an exclamation, or )b) a clause conussting
of the topic (‘theme’), the previously mentioned information, introduced perhaps by a
definite deictic (‘the’, ‘this’, ‘that’), and the comment (‘rheme’), introduced by an
indefinite drictic (‘a’, ‘some’, ‘many’, etc.), the rem information. The translator coo
hurdle the topic using relerential synonyms more freely than the comment, mhtch
must be faithfully rendered. Topic and comment must not be confused with subtect
and predicate. The meaning of a clause is thus an entity acts, exists or equates with an
entity or quality. Grammatical meaning can also be identified as (c) a word-group,
which may comprise Nida’s (1975a( entities, events, abstracts (or qualities) or
relations. Note that a collocation cuts across a word-group, if it consists of an ‘empty’
serb plan verbal neon (e.g. ‘pay a visit’, etc.) and maybe turned into a single TL verb

Grammatical moaning may also be rendered by more or less standard transpositions

from the SL to the TL. Thus a Germ an encapsulated nominal phrase (die corn
Ingrnieur’gebaute Bt’dckr) may be renderedhy nounplus adjecsisalclause; a Romance
language noun with an adjectival clause or past participle, plus preposition and noun
or a present participle ptus noun-object, may become an English double noun
compound (‘family situation’) or noun plus preposition plus noun (‘the house on the
hill’). There are many such standard procedures, well documented in the literature,
e.g. in Vinay and Darbelnet (1976), Malblanc (1961), Friederich (1969), Truffaut
(1968), Diller and Kornelius (1978) and various articles in Lebende Spr’achen.

Lexical meaning starts where grammatical meaning tinishes: it is ergerential and

precise, and has to be considered both outside and within the context. Further, all
lexical units bane elements of grammar. Nouns may have gender, number, case; are
‘count’, or ‘mass’; are plus or minus animate, abstract, human, etc. Verbs may be
finite or infinitise, bane person, gender and number, indicate time, mood, voice,
aspect, transitivity. In eoeo, lenigrammasicalmeaningsren through nouns and vcrbs is,
or isa variation on: ‘An agent (implicitly animate) acts or’ affects an object (implicitly
inanimate) with an instrument, at a certain time, at a certain place, in a crrtuin
manner, to the advantage and/or disadvantage 0f a second object (implici°y animate),
causing the giest object to bra new object (or have a new quality).’ WitI in the
contest, agents and objects may each be personified, hypostasized or reified (for
 What ttasslatinr thenry is about 27

‘person’ read ‘institution’, for ‘intelligrtsce ‘—(pace Ryle, 1963)—read ‘spirit’, etc
This is, I behese. the basic neutral unmarked natural ref erence stung at any
statement but only the first iso or’ three compnnents ate essential. In cases of (a) ambifuity, atid (b) complicated syntactic structures, employed rithet for making
pardown
ticular emphas is or owing to the clumsiness, pomposity incompetence etc., of the writer the translator may find it useful to tefen to the above ‘model’, which boils
to ‘Who does what to whom whore, when, how, with what result?’ and, where
appropriate, ‘Why?

Secondly, and again oat of contest, the translator can look at lesical items )words,
pheasol serbs, nouns, etc.) in three difterent ways as dictionary items: (a) having tour
types of senses: concrete, figurative (or mental), technical, colloquial )notc that
colloquial sense, often referred to as an ‘idiom’, is frequently difficult to relate to the
other thnee types of senses (e.g. mainos: house; family; home-made; that’s the
goods)); )b) having four degrees of trequency: primary based on trequency in the
modern language only and having nothing to do with ‘true’ meaning ot etymology);
secondary, collocational, nonce (e.g. brechen; beeuk; inftingr, somit, ctush, etc
vuack (outs), inttinge (law), commit )udultery)—tho ‘nonce’ sense would be only in
one utterance, and necessarily idiolectal; (c) corn and peripheral; the core meaning
includes all the essential senses (thus, for annut’et’, ‘provide’, ‘secure’, ‘insure’,
‘guarantee’, ‘ensure’, etc , make up the core meaning; ‘verify’, ‘stabilize’, ‘settle’
perhaps comprise the peripheral meaning).

Thus far the discussion of lesical meaning has been general. Lesical translation iv
more complicated. Any bilingual dictionary appears to imply that most SL words have
precise TL equivalents. The translator knows that this is not so, eves before words are
totaled to their contests, tiest theough their collocation, then through clauses,
sestencrs, etc., related to toetrncr and thrsr idiotcctal concepts. Os the costsuty,
most SL words have a variety of separate, contiguous, overlapping, inclusive ot
complement ary senses (Nida, l975a) (sememes), each 0f which consists of sensecomponents.
Since both the equivalent words and their senses are differently
arranged in the TL, translation may be said to corvist lcxically ol a transfer sot of
senses )sememes), but of scssc.componests (vemes). The various techniques and
procedures of componestial analysis can at toast show the translator how to
redistribute SL serve components in the TL, thus showing him wheee to avoid a one
)mord)-to.one )word) translation. (When and when sot to translate word for word,
clause Ion clause, sequence for sequence iv one ol the mainconcerns ot translation
theory.) The translator has no stake in the question of semantic univrtsalv or the
dtstinctton between murk ens and distisguishrrv )Kato, 1964), clusvcmev and semes
(Pottier, 1974) which upset the linguists (e.g. Balinget, 1965), but only in the
procedures for splitting words or word series into components before transferring
them aed then rotating thrm to contest is the TL. Take the word ‘bawdy’. home
typical dictionaries give the fattening definitions: ‘lewd’ )Chiambes’a’o Tsvraiirth
Cesraar’y); ‘obscene, indecent’ )Hamlys’o); ‘humorously indecent’ COD); ‘)l) relating
to bawd, (2) ‘obscene, lewd, indecent, smutty’ )Webnter’); ‘obscene’ (Pesguis); ‘(I)
related to ten, (2) humorous’ )Collinn Coscioe), In bilingual dictiosaries, it is
‘abocène, patllard, terpudiqur’ )Hatwap New Standard); ‘obocEete, impudique’ )Har’r’ap
28 Approaches to translation

Shorter); ‘unouchtig, unfldrig’ (Caonell’n, Langenschesdl); ‘onceno, nporco’ (Cannell’s

Italian).

As I toe it, a componential analysis of ‘bawdy’ writ brntg the translator mach closer than this, on the whole, inadequate and frequently deftcsent serses of synonyms
The basic defect of synonymy is that the synonyms peeled, ovcnlnp, stroddle so
relotionto the second language, that so tnranyveebs (nsüroen, osch ausesnander’netoert,
conalaler, r’ayonner’, corner) and adjectives (nchrnachtsg, déchar’né) can have only
about hatf their meaning conveyed by a single word sn the second language.
Componential analysis, however, concentrates on the nucleus of the meansng. I
sofgest that thr components of ‘bawdy’ are:

A. Enorntial (functional)
1. Shockinf (emotive).
2. Related to the ses act (lactual).
3. Humorous (emotive/factual).
B. Secondary (dencriptice)
1. Loud.
2. ‘Vulgar’ (in relation to social class).

The translator should also note that the word is ‘unmarked’ or ‘neutral’ for dialect,
sociolect and for degree of formality, emotiveness, generality and intensity.

How many of these components the translator will require to use will depend or (a)
the importance of the word in the contest, and (b) the requirement for brevity. If the
concept (‘bawdy’) is a key-word in she SL test, hr may translute all five, und at trust
the lb ree essential components—Al, A.2 and A.3—usually can still be combined.
If ‘bawdy’ is peripheral to the content, one ‘synonym’, as in the dictionaries, may be
sufficient, but two adjectives or an adjective qualified by on adverb will usually be
perlerablr.

The ordering of emotive before factual and of functional before descriptive meaning
is, as I have maintained elsewhere, generally valid in translation. Farther, it is as
important that the translator get the features of register right as the semantic
componrnts themselves.

I am suggesting that, as a translation procedure, componential analysis is both more

accurate and profitable than the use of synonymy, that it is likely to bypass the all too
common ‘one-to-one’ translation, and that normally my above-mentioned proposal
maybe the mosteconomical method of carrying it out. Thr morn conventional matris
method, variations of which are recommended by Nida, Pettier, Coseriu, Leech,
Wotjak, Mounin, Beckelr, etc., using synonyms and possibly a generic or superordinate
term to determine common, diagnostic, potential (connotative) and supplement.
ary components, ss more useful when Iwo or more of the synonyms appear and have
to be distinguished in the SL text. Thus,
 What translation theory is about 29

Shokio Seo Huwour Loudseo Vulgasiy homey

(Haic) (orde,o/7

Note that the above is an ‘open’ series of woods (the number of ‘closed’ series of
words, such as those for cattle, furniture, ranks aod colours, is small relative to the
total vocabulary) aod the use aod choice of such woeds is determined as ofleo by
appropriate collocatioo as by iotriosic meaning (i.e. componenlial analysis): Ibis
partscularly applies to generic teems or head-words such as ‘big’ and ‘large’, which are
dif icult to analyse. A further problem in translating any of this word-series arises front its primary component ‘shocking’, since it is so closely linked to any SL and TL
cult resnperiod ftimeandsocialcas ,andis ubject,likeanyslangword,torapidchangeinbothrespects:‘blo dy’inPygmalion(19 2)becomes‘blo min’arse’inMyFaoLady(1956).Notealsotha theobsolet ‘bawd’cherishedbymoderndictonariesinmer lyaredhering.
Componential analysis is often set in the contest of a semanlic field or domain. The

torranslmay
ation theornotist hasbeto beanother
versed in field thexample)
eory, bearing in minad thfield
ai exceptjun01
in a narrowaareastructure
or a series such asormilaitary‘mosaic’
ranks (Trier’s Lcsystem
t —Kunot—Wio(Trier’s
oen (1973) may
term), but a loose conglomeration of words of senses centred in one topic.
Componential analysis is normally seen as an estracontestual procedure, where the
translator lakes a Irnical unit, looks into it as widely and deeply (in its historical
resonance) as a monolingual dictionary will permil, and decides on its limits—its
meuningcan stirtih solar, but no further. (Une page cradle cannot quite be rendered

by‘verycolremarks’).Howevr,ther isnoreasonwhyadiferntcomponetial nalysi houldnotalsobemadecontexualy,b detcingthesmanticfeatures‘imposed’onawordbyitslnguistcandsituaonalconte ‘Qu’ilenavilt Ipets,outal’heur,lorsqu’ilavildtcouvertlsétoiles’(A.Mulran,LaConditon

hunsaine). The translation by A. Macdonald has: ‘How much nearer he had been toil
a moment before, when he had first seen the slurs.’ The translation of dticouvert us
‘first seen’, which may or may not be justified, can only hr visualized in the siluation
by a decomposition in relation to Chen’s situation, when ‘discovered’, ‘found out’ is
reduced to ‘first seen’ as its basic features.

It should be added that whilst componential analysis is basically and beneficially an

rutracontrutsal procedure, trom a translator’s point of view it can be operated at
three ulages. The conventional procedure:
man: mule/adult boy: male/child
woman: trmulr/udult girl: female/child
30 Approaches to ttatstatiot

is of little use to him unless at least two of the stems (say ‘boys’ and ‘girls’) weee
juntapused in the SL test, and the TL language had no one-la- one equts’alents. If only
one item say ‘giet’ appeaeed in the SL test, an esteacuntestual CA might gsve as
essential components: (1) female, (2) aged peehaps 3 to peehaps 35, (3) peobably unmaeeied. At the thied miceocontestual stage, a sentence ‘She mao merely a gsel
might fise (a) female, (b) aged peehaps 14 to peehaps 35, (c) physically meak,
hesitaot, dilatuey, onpuoctual, iodecisis’e, etc. Only the maceucontest could then
assist the teanslatoe to decide the sense of she thied component.

The following are the main uses of compooeotial aoalysts foe the teanslator:
1. To translate an SL woed into two oe mote TL words by dsslnbutsog tts semantic
components ovee a larger TL aeea.
2. To distinguish she meanings of two collocuted SL synonyms, if the dssttnctton is

emphasised in the SL lest (theeetoee ‘din and clamour’ may be cacar’me ci but may begt-and brouhaha, and sausage etfar’ouche could only be estescated feom
the contest).
3. To analyse the content of one at mote SL words within a serses (e.g. ol meals,
clashes, etc.).
4. To espuse and lilt in gaps in the TL lenin, due to cultural distance between SL and
TL, in lb esame semantic field (e.g. car-afon, Gener-atobetst, bour-gade, bout-g,
Or-disiariuo or any French teem toe bread).
5. To anal yse neologisms (e.g. ‘zonked’—eshausted, slang).
6. To esplain cultural differences between one word with one common main
component, bus different secondary components, in SL and TL.
7. To analyse theme words shut require estended definitions in TL (e.g. ‘esprit’).
8. To reduce metaphor, which always has two or more sense-components, to sense
(e.g. in ‘Le soleil a mange Ia couleur bleur do papier’, mange maybe ‘impair’ and

The translation theorist is concerned with every type of translation procedure:

(a) Tr-ansct-iplien (‘loan words’, adoption, transfer), which may or may not be
rrquirrd for SL institutional or cultural words to provide authenticity or local colour
respectively. Some 0f lb ese remaio in the TL permanensly—détente, démar’che
(‘adopted words’); ushers are ‘loans’—kulkhuz, kumsumul, sputnik—they will nut
stay.

(b) One-ru-one rranstatiun, e.g. la marion, ‘the house’.

(c) Thruugh-rranslarion (‘loan-translalion’), e.g. ‘People’s Chamber’ Our Vulk.skammer,
‘Committee on Trade and Devrlopmrnt’ Our Cumité du Commerce et du
Déreluppemenr, a common procedure for international institutional seems.
(d) Leaical synonymy, translation by a close TL equivalent. Otis often possible to
acbirvr closer interlingual than intralingual synonymy, particularly in reference to
objects and actions. ‘To die, to sleep, to dream’ can be translated literally into any
 What translation theory is about 31

language, aou sneretore is naroly synonymy. Objects n’tth identical functions, e.g. ‘a
house” ‘assindoss’, ‘a bath’, canasually be translated literally pron’tded thereiscalturat
oveetap, atthough the objects may hate a diffeeent shape, stze and/oe composition to
and mithin the SL and the TL cat uee. Similarty, genenat (non-speciftc) qaahttes can often be teannlated. Thoee are, hossenee, many specif c objects. actions and qnahttes.
often defined by inadequate and inaccaeate synonyms both to mono- and btltngnaf dictionaeirs. schore a neat camponential analysts uttI gao the translator a somewhat
more satisfacsoey torsion, e.g. em Greio: a tory otd (aged) man (secondary
components: greyness, senility).
(0) Connpanentia/ analyoio (already discussed). Some form of componenttat analysts
should atsrays be preferred to synonymy as a peosisionat transtatton procedaee,

partheticalatest.
rtyif the lBut,
esical uniint isakoy-goneraf,
wordoeisimporthetant inuse
the contofest. Sy005ymyt s mane acceptabte for ‘peeipheeat’ words not directty refuted to the main argument of
synonymy, the kind of synonymy one finds ab fib
and ad nauoeasn in Caooell’o German Dictionary (e.g. Ende is ‘end; conctuston; close,
finish; result, issue, goat, aim, object, poepose; estremity’), is the rain of accurate
translation, and paraphrase isesen worse.
)f) Transposition, the replacement of one geammaticat unit by another. ‘According to
myfeiend’,meinFreundmeinte.
(g) Modulation (see Vinay and Daebelnet, 1976)—saniation in point of siew: e.g.
Lebensgefahr, danger de mort, ‘mactaffy dangeeoas’ (i.e. no English eqais’atent);
assurance-maladie, heatth insurance.

(h) Compensation, when foss of meaning or sound effect or metaphor in one part of a
sentence is compensated in another pact.
(I) Cutiuraf equicalence, e.g. (baccafauréat, ‘A-lend’).
(j) Translation label, i.e. an approsimate equis’alent, sometimes proposed as a
collocation in incensed commas, which may later be accepted: e.g. promotion sociale,
‘social adsancement’; autogeotion, ‘woekee management’ or ‘neff-management at aft

)k) Definition, usualfy eecast as a desceiptise noun-phrase or adjectisal clause.

(I) Pan’aphn’aao, an amplification or free nondering of the meaning of a nenlence: the
translator’s fast resort.

(m) Eapansion (esoffement)—grammatical enpansion: e.g. ‘taste of’, acoir legotfi do.
(n) Contraction—grammatical reduction: (F) science anatomique, ‘anatomy’; (E)
‘empty phrases’, des phraseo.
(s) Recasting oentenceo. French comples sentences are sometimes recast as English
co-ordinate nestcocos. German comptes sentences are sometimes rendered as two or
mono TL sentcocos.

)p) Rearrangement, impros’emenss (jargon, mistakes, mispnints, idiot cot, clumsy

writing, etc.). Only justified if (a) the SL test is concerned mainly with facts, or (b)
the writing in defectine.
32 Approaches to

(q) Translation couplet, literal translation at’ translation label plus transcription.
All translation procedures vary between conrlraittt (mandatory) and opOon (optional).
Other procedures sach as ovet- and anden-Iranslalion have already been
discussed.

The area of teut-liogaistics, cohesion or discourse analysts, i.e. ltngaistic analysts

beyond the sentence, has evident application in translation theory. Tbec000eclions betoeensentcocos range from punctuation (which may dif er in SL and TL),
demonstrative deictics, referential synonyms, comparatives, superlatives, enameoations
(which are ‘dashes’ in French) to contrastive or accumulative conlunctioss. If
the connections are esplicit, therein no problem. The translator is more interested is

the logical gaps, the missing verbs or noon-case implications which can be discovered only by considering the previous or the subsequent sentcocos. ‘Whai are the needs
and requirements?’ may be a mystifying sent ence until the translator has discovered
who needs and reqaireswhat, torwhat orlorwhom, of whom, where, aodwhen. Thus,
again, translation theory mahes aconneclion between discourse analysis, on the one
hand, and the variations of valency theory, case-grammar and Tesnière’s dependency
grammar, on the other—Tennière (1959) himself produced forty pages of valuable
translation theory which he called mélala.oe. Further aspects of discourse analysis that
may assist the translator ate all the devices of emphasis (italics, mocked word-order,
emphatic pronouns or suppletise verbs, superlative, it’s, who, ‘cleft sentences’, etc.),
which may contrast wish unmarked parallel elements in the preceding or succeeding
sentence. Nevertheless, discourse analysis may be only a marginal aspect of translalion
theory, since the sentence is usually the basic translatioo unit, and often has a
cohereot appropriate meaning. Discourse analysis may ho maioly anessootial point of
reference for (a) establishing the significance of oIl connectivcs including pronouos,
and (b) clanilying semantically undetermined espressions.

Lastly, rho translation theorist is concerned with corsair particular problems: metaphor,
synonyms; proper names; institutional and cultural terms, grammatical, lesical
and referential ambiguity, cliché, quotatioss; cultueal locus, overlap and distaocc,
idiolccr; reologisms; poetry; jargon, the four categories of key terms.
Of these problems, metaphor is the most importani. I have suggested elsewheee
that there are four types of metaphor: fossilized, stock, recently creaied and original;
that ore has to consider the metaphoe, the object it celates to, the image
(eehiele) and the sense (tenor, grouod) befoee one teanslaics; that iheee are live
methods of trarslatisg melaphor: transferring the image, fiodiog ao equivalent image,
converting the metaphor to a simile or sense plus the simile: fioally, most
frequently, converting the image to scone, which may involve analysis into several
components, including figurative and concrete elements. Further, the translator has
to consider cultural, univeesal and personal elements in the metaphoe, and whether
 What trasslatior theory is about 33

or srmantic translation is to hr used. C. Brooke-Rose’s dsstsnctseo

(1958) betst’een metaphor uod symbol combined svith literal meaning has to hr
respected is the sense that the latter, if seriously ceoceis’ed, may have lobe culturally
adapted. Again, sioce all colloquial language is metaphorical, receot aod usually
ephemeral
topics such as sport, fioance, pop music, etc. Lastly, the traosluton has to coosider
whys if es’rr, he is justified is teanslatiog flat ‘literal’ (i.e. fessshzed metaphar)
language by stock metaphor, either as a compensation procedure or to eolccen flat
language is an ‘information’ test.
The last sobject I propose to dral with is asy kind of detail is nealagisms, which may
be either recently coined by ethers or original. They cue be categorized as:
(a) Fas’ntal—completely new words. These acetate —the lecua claasicus is the
sevrnteenth-centnry ward ‘got’ (from ‘chaen’)—in srmaotic traoslalsao. If they are
original, they should be transcribed, and recreated, if erceolly coined. In communscatier
ttanslation, they should be ‘reduced’ to their sense. Brand names should be
transcribed or given their TL brand names.
(b) Eponyms—recenlly based on proper names, including ins’enters and names of
firms and towns. (For the purposes of translation theory at any rate, I am extending
the meaning and area of ‘eponym’ to include all instances of transferred one of prepee
names, e.g. ‘macadamize’, ‘Stulingead’, ‘academic’. Tb e treesdaey meaning of
antonomania (one of a proper name to express a general idea) is also included within
my definition of ‘nponym’, hoe the primary meaning of ant000masia (substitution of
epithnt, description, etc., for proper name) is included within my ‘referential
synonym’.) The translator often has to hr careful not to transcribe these (beycooet,
but not limaget’) and in particular bnware of the Western nations’ chaovinism about
their medical vocabulary (Röntgen, Graves, Hodgkin, Wilson, etc.).
(c) Derived—formed with productive peefixes (i.e. dc-’, ‘mis-’, ‘non-’, ‘pee-’, ‘pro-’)
and ssffiaies (e.g. ‘-is, ‘-ize’, “izalion’), e.g. mindefine, non-event, encyclopaedism,
lanes, paraclinique, etc. If such neologismn are transparently comprehensible, the
lranslatar can cassiossly ‘natsealize’ them, assuming that Latin and Greek roots are
acceptable in the TL—particslarly in technological tests.
(d) Nets’ vefleeaeiena, e.g. ‘urban guerrilla’, ‘ansacial boom’, route fleorie, oui’rier
spdciafiaé (‘skilled worker’). Normally it is unwise to attempt a loan or ‘through
leanslation’ unless the translator is officially authorized to do so, otherwise he has to
‘normalize’. Is ‘scenic roule’ acceptable for rautefleurie?
(n) Phra.nal (nouns on vnrbs)—’teudn-off’, ‘zero-in’, etc. The translator has to
normalize these in the TL usually by translating into two or there weeds.
(f) Acresynt,e (new a trounlatien label Ion any combination of initial letters or
syllables, and apparently the most productive element in European languages).
International acronyms are ann ally teanslated (e.g. EEC, CEE, EG)—nutional
acronyms urn usu ally retained with, if necessary, a ‘translation’ of their function,
rather than their meaning, e.g. ‘CNAA—CNAA, degree-awarding body for higher
education colleges (non-university) in the United Kingdom’; ‘EDF, the French
34 Approarhes to

Electricity Authority’, ‘ZUP, arras for priority houstng drvrlopmrot’. Wordt dero’ed from acrotsyms hose to be normalizrd (e.g. cegérorfe, ‘membrr of CGT, thr Frrnch
TUC’; osuoien (rrlatrd to UNO); omicard, ‘minimum wugr rumor’.

(g) Blesdo (‘“portmanteoo” words’), i.r. comhitsatiot s of two words, highly produc’ tivr. Thrsr rithr brcomr inter utiooulisms for ot trust European languagrs if thry
havr LatinfGrrrk roots (r.g. ‘mrritocracy’, ‘tuchygraph’, ‘rurocrut’, ‘btonics’, many
medical terms) or they ore ‘borrowed’ (e.g. oovkhoz, oot’sarkom, oocpreme, esareb)
or adopted (e.g. ‘motel’). If no recogniord rqoisalrnt exists they should hr translated
(e.g. Abkufi, ‘mania for abbreviations’, dcotuge, ‘environment cult’, but ‘workaholic’,
ergontane(?)). Opaque bloods such us ‘ruckus’ should, where posstble, hose both
components (naction, rumpus) transluted.
(h) Semantic, old words with new meanings, e.g. ‘sophisttcatod’, ‘viable’, ‘credsble’,
‘gay’, bate (F), Boor (G). These should be ‘normalized’ (i.e. translated by a ‘normal’
word) bat ‘base’ should peehaps replace the patronizing ‘rank and file’ and the
oscmuciating ‘grassroots’, as an old word with a new mrantng (cI. ‘chalk lace’).
(i) Abbrei’iationo (shortened form of word). These are commoner in French and
German than English: e.g. Uni, Philo, ‘Beeb’, ‘tibet’, hoc, Hama; they are
normalized (i.e. translated unabbreviated), unless there is a recognized equivalent
(eg. bus, metro, plus sci—lech terms).

The process of decoding a hnfuisticully difficult test has been described as ‘decontr
ing’ (Bnislin, 1976), Nida (1964), following Chomsky, has proposed several ‘kennrl
sentences’ as the basis of a neutral or intermediate language, logically constructed,
with metaphorsconvertod to sense, between SL and TL. For Europranlangaages, the
main problem is one of abstract ‘jargon’, i.e. words that contain three or four parts of
speech within themselves. Take the following sentence from Sartee’s Critique de to
t’ai,ton dialectique (p. 209): ‘L’nnitti negative de Ia nanetti inlénionisCr dons Ia
rCitleatinn de larécipmocité sr eéestet’ionise pnnr nuns tonsenunité do monde, commr
lieu commun do not oppositions.’ The translator has to force this sentence into some
kind of neutral language: ‘Since we have not enough goods (rareté, scarcity), we live
together (unite) unhappily (negative) and therefore in our minds (intCrioriaée) our
links with each other (reciprocitC) are purely material (reification); in our public life
again (rCextet’ionne), we appear lobe all together in the world, where we all meet in a
common place manner though we oppose each other!’ (I take lieu commun in two
senses). This ‘interpretation’ can be compared with J. Starr and 3. B. Atkinson’s
‘translation’: ‘The negative unity of scarcity, interiorized in the reification of
reciprocity, re-esterionizes itself for us all in the unity of the world as the common
ground 0f oar oppositions’ (Cumming, 1960).
In the pre’transfation process we reduce texts to simple language before we reconvert
themtoshrcomnesponding jargon, if it is appropriate. Themost impomnanlstagninvhis
process is usually the splinting up of words into components that each represent a part
of speech; a phrase such as ‘the growthfal actualizing of potential’ would asaally hr
converted to ‘teachers gradually bring oat the promise theirpapils have shown’, again
 What tearslatiar henry is about 35

shoning that the translator is often compelled to supply tech nouns with subleOs and
objects. Thin peocens peesupposen the notortoun ietiium comparationio, the existence
of a univeesat logic embedded in each language without which translation and
communicationwould not be possible.

When a part of a test is impoetant to the writer’s intention, bat tnsaflictently deteemined semantically, the teanslatoe has to intrepeet. Intact the cultural htstory of
teaunlation is ful of esamples of such intrepretation, misinterpretation and distortion (Voltaire ‘misunderstood’ Shakespeare), which may be due to the translator’s
iIrsically
ncompetence asatmuchleant
as to the(i.r.contempornotarygrammatically,
cultural climate. Translation escept
is normally wriint en the
in moderdistant
n language, past)
which in inaitselreflection
f a form of interpreoftation,theand
TL culture. Most food translations are stamped by the translator’s presorality mote
or lent an firmly an, say, Menuhin’n interpretation of ‘the Beethoven or the Elgar’, ill
may use a semantically determined bat intellectually pretentious phrase (unless
addressed to professional musicians).
Intrrpeetalion presents the translator with a challenge. In particular, when he is laced
with dacuments of a past age or ala geographically remote culture, he has to probe
layers of lenical derelopment: wordn an spiritn, an myths, an people, an objects, as
ebjects and symbuln, as metaphors, an idioms; farther, abstractions may be personified
or reified. Only a precise ethnological and linguistic knowledge can assist the
in making the ‘cat’ at the appropriate place, and many genreal key-terms,
thr Oerrk unldç ud’gnfOg, the Latin cit-rut, hr French genrilhomme may hate to be
cnntinually erdrfinrd. ‘The act of translation places alien utterances in our mould’, an
Crick (1976) has stated in his brilliant book. Evans-Pritchard (1975) han written of the
hasty ‘adoption’ and genrealization (transcription) of words like ‘taboo’ (Irom
Pulynesia), ‘mana’ (from Mrlanrnia) and ‘tutem’ (from N. American Indians),
‘haraka’ (from N. African Arabs), no that they quickly lost their cultural meaning; of
the difference in meaning of wards such as ‘god’, ‘spirit’, ‘soul’ or ‘ghost’ to the native
and the teanslatue, with its ‘partial overlap’ of meaning. ‘The traunlation in the
inteepertatiun’, he stated, warning that most influential late-nineteenth-century
thinkers were agnasricn or atheists sshrn they wrote and tended to look for function or
rule ar theory rather than the eichnenn of meaning.
Interpretative teasslatian, if use can use the teem, requires a semantic method of
teasslatien combined with a high esplanatary power, mainly in termn of the SL
culture, with only a side glance at the TL reader. In fact the greater the esplanatory
pnwee, the mare the reader is likely to understand, bat the translation must nut
‘Cumpeumise’ in his direction. I refer tointerpeelative translation of tests about the SL
culture. But ether tests which hate important srmantically undetermined passages or
weeds, e.g. mathematical tents ur newspaper reports, may require interpretation and
be cemmunicatis’ely translated.

Encept in the GDR, where trasslaturs are trained to show sacialist consciousness in
theieversienn, teanslaters naw have In strive tube ‘ebjective’ and ‘scientific’ through a
36 Approaches to

paradosical peocedaee: first, thinking themselves into the minds of their authors,
then, ‘reconciling’ their author’s language with their own; working through a second kind of ‘double ‘articulation’ (cf. Martinet, 1960), that of word and proposition,
concept and idea, respectively, which are different bat inneparable, becaune the
neacal processes that precede and peodace words are not likely to gice op their scoretn• finally, takinf account ot their own interests and peetadices by reminding
thrmcclsrs that they too wilt coon mono loom their opponents than from their friends,
and therefore wilt preserve ‘alien’ thoaght rather than try to convert on adapt it. Thin! think is the modern translator’s spirit that, say, Evans-Pritchard advocated: how
successfully it can be practised is moot, but I think it will be a little better than
perviously.

I conclude by attempting to suggrst what translation nheory cannot and can do. It
cannot make a bad translator into a good one. It cannot make a student tntelligrnt on
sensitive—two qualities of a good translator. In fact, if someone is sensitive to
language an well as his own language and pursues facts as well as words, he can do
without translation theory, just as an actor sonsitive to his art can do without staining.
Translation is an art as well as a skill and a science, and translation theory cannot
teach anyone to write well, although it can rsposr bad writing as effectively as
translation itsell. (Bad writing is bad writing in anylanguage, and is harder to disguise
and is morn exposed, when translated.) It barely touchesthe ‘ann’ otteanslation, but it
should provide a oraining in scrupulous and meticulous accuracy.

What translation theory can do into show the student all that is or maybe involved in
the translation process (and certainly that isfar mote thanwhat hr isusually aware of)
and to offer principles and guidelines (some 0f which, like those relating to the
translation 0g institutional teems, are contradictory), after considering which, he
makes his choices and decisions. Further, translation theory can stop him making
bowlers like translating the title ol a periodical or mistakes of usages like translating a
layman’s teem by a neohnicaltorm. Muinly, tho translation theonist is concerned loser
that no linguistic or cultural factor is ignored when one is translating. Provided that all
the theorist’s genrealizations arise 1mm practice and are continually illustrated by
esamples and their proposed translations, there is much to he done.

Finally, translation theory has an excitement and pleasure of its own, which parallels
translation itself, t is concerned with mundane and practical things like the use and
significance of inverted commas or variations on the Cloze proorduer of dealing with
mispnists, at use mnmrst, and questions like the relation between thought, language
and behaviour at another, It is relatively uncharted; is many areas 0g knowledge,
there appear to have been original thinkers who have, albeit briefly, reflected on the
problems of translating their subject. Further, one has the consolation ol knowing
that hewever misnuken the generalirusions one is setting up, the illustrations are
normally natural and interesting. Incidentally, any teems translation theory (unlike
linguistics) invests should be ‘teansparrut’, i.e. srlf-rsplunasory, and since it helps the
translator to reduce jargon to simple language, it should avoid this type of jargon
inselg. (Up to sow, its leading practitioners have not done so.)
 What trarsiation theory is about 37

Translation theory, like translation, has no particular boands. All the more reason for
it to be concerned with precise concrete tnstances.

Translation theory goes hand in hand with translation methodology at every stage, so
that it acts as a body ot reference both toe the translat on process procedare and toe translation criticism. Since translation theory is applied to a variety of texts, and is not
basically concerned with comparing language systems, its theortzing functton consists
of identifying a genre at or particular problem (say) how to translate oikeutkanolzx,
eduskunta, simiomies (Finnish), enumerating the various options, relattng them to the
TL text and reader, proposing a solution and then discussing the genreattty ot the
problem toe future use. It is an applied and interrelated discipline, even if it tsfartrom
being wholly applied linguistics. Certain theoretical problems, such as what constitutes
translation equivalence, variance or invariance, the ideal unit ot translatton, or
even the process of translation accompanied by diagrams and logical symbols, appear
to me now tube not very profitable unless they are related 10000 language function
informing a group of test-types. As I see it, any talk of a single translation theory, or
of one semantic theory for that matter, is a waste of time. Translation theory is
eclectic; it draws its material from many sources. Like meaning or translation, ii
embraces a whole network of relations. At the same time, translation theory,
peerisely because it is bound up with methodology (a plan either for translation
practice orgortranslation criticism eons through the entire preceding paper), goes into
areas beyond anylinguistics: the decision on the quality of a SL test; the arguments in
favourogotagainstvarious proceduresfortranslatinginstitutionalorcultural terms; the
translator’s use of punctuation: question marks, colons, inverted commas and italics;
the criteria for misprints; the grey area between evidence and intuition and taste; nod
particularly, the training inasense of priority, of what is important and unimportant
in the sense and sounds of a test—I doubt whether this has anything much to do with
linguistics. On the other hand, Wandruzska (1978) has maintained that a sound
linguistics depends on a sound translation theory, whilst Vincent (l97b) says precisely
the opposite, and maintains that translation theory will depend on developing a
working model toe discourse analysis. But I think our main problems are more
immediate than these. Translation theory precipitates a methodology concesssed with
making the translator pause and think, with produring a natural test or a conscious
deviation from a natural tent or a closest natural equivalent, with sensitizing him
against bowlers and false cognates, but not being afraid to recognize true cognates.
The translation theorist or teacher picks up instances as he meets them in a tent. But
he will also profit by relaling them to the type of translation theory syllabus I have
aslempted to sketch here, beginning with the large questions of test analysis, meaning
and translation methods, passing through points or word or punctuation detail to
symbolism and interpretation. It is clear that some sections of the syllabus are, as they
stand, a little peripheral. Much has still to be done to relate typeo of meaning,
discourse analysis, vatency theory and metaphor study to translation theory. The
work is only at a start.
3. Communicative and semantic translation
(I)

5 A ooolatios ehoald rrflro: he Ojdr of Ar ocgoal.

10. A Ouoelalioo yocceo add So or oo,Ofroo, hr origosol

(ItedoofTra,oluliau,T.H Ssoocy,Cspo,lhsh,p.54)

In the pee-linguistics period of writing on translation, which may be suid to dute from
Cicero through St. Jerome, Luther, Dryden, Tytler, Herder, Goethe, Schiriermacher,
Bubrr, Orlrga y Gusset, not to say Savory, opinion swung between literal and
free, faithful und beautiful, exact und natural trunslution, depending on whether the
bius was lobe in fuvour of the author or the reader, the source or the target language
at the text. Up to the nineteenth century, literal translation represented a philological
academic exercise from which the cultural reformers were trying to rescue literature.
In the nineteenth century, a more scientific approach was brought to brat on
translation, suggesting that certain types of tests must be accurately translated, whilst
othrrs should and could not be translated ax all! Since the rixr of modern linguistics
(philologywusbecominglinguisxicsherrixlhr latefifties), and unliciputrdby Tyxler in
1790, Lurbuud, BrIbe, Knox and Rica, the generat emphasis, supported by communication-theorists
as well as by non-literary translators, has been placed on Ihe
‘nader—on informing the reader effectively and appropriately, notably in Nida, Firth,
Rotter and the Leitzig School. In contrast, the brilliant essays of Benjamin, Valery
and Nabokov (anticipated by Croce and Ortega y Gusset) advocating literal translation
have appeared us isolated, paradoxical phrnomrna, relevant only to translating
works 0f high literary culture. Koller (1972) has stated that the equivalent-effect
principle of translation intending to rule out all others, particularly the predominance
of any formal elements such as word or structure.

The apparent triumph 0f the ‘consumer’ is, I think, illusory. The conflict of loyalties,
the gap brtwern emphasis on source and targrt language will always nrmain as the
overriding problem in Inanslution theory and practice.

Howrvrr, the gap could perhaps hr narrowrd if the previous terms were replaced as
follows

31
 Communication and semantic translation (II 39

LEffL\ enuvc
FAOFU

Communicative translation attempts to produce on tts readets an effect as close as

possible to that obtained on she readers of the original. Semantic trauslatton attempts
breeder, ascloselyasthesemanticundsynlacticsteuctures ofthesecondlanfoafe
allow, the esact contextual meaninf of the ortfbnal.
In theory, there are wide dillerences between the two mrthods. Communicative
translation addresses itself solely to lb e second reader, who does not antlctpate
dilliculties or obscurities, tnd wonld roped a generous transfer of foreifn elements
iiiIo his own culture us well as his lanfnafe where necessary. But even here the
translator still has to respect and work on the form of the source lanfoage text as the
only material basis for his work. Semantic translation remains within the original
ciillnre and assists the reader only in its connotations if they constitute lbrestertial
human (non-ethnic) message of the test. One basic difference between the taco
methods is that where there is a congict, the communicative mast emphasize the
‘lorcr’ rather than the controt of the message. Thus foe Bissiguv’ Hund or Chien
mécitint, the communicative translation Boo’as’e of the dog! is mandatory; the
srmunlic translations (‘dog that bites’, ‘savage dog’) would be more informative but
less effective. Generally, a communicative translation is likely to be smoother,
simpler, clearer, more direct, mu re curvenlional, conforming to a particular register
0f language, lending so andeetranslate, i.e. to use more generic, hold-all terms io
difficult passagrs. A semantic translation lrnds to he more complex, more awkward,
more detailed, ma cc concentrated, and pursues the thought-processes rather than the
intention of the transmitter, It tends to ocertranslate, to he more specific than the
original, to include more meaning sin its scareh foe one nuance of meaning.
Hummer, in commanicaticr as in semantic translation, provided that equivalent-
effect is secured, the literal noed-for-snord translation is not only the best, it is the
only valid method of translation. Three is no excuse for unnecessary ‘synonyms’, let
alone paraphrases, in any type of translation.
Connresrly, both semantic and comsnunicativr translation comply with the usually
accepted syntactic rquivalents (Vinay and Darbrlnel’s ‘transpositions’) for the two
languages in question. Thus, by both methods, a sentence such us ‘Ii traceena Ia
Mancheennageass’woold normally be translated as ‘He swam across the Channel’. In
semantic, but not cammanicalis’e translation, any deviation from SL stylistic norms
would be reflected in an equally wide deviation from the TL norms, but where such
not-inn clash, the deriationn arenas easy to formulate, and the translator basso show
certain tension between the writer’s manner and the compulsions of the target
language. Thus when the writer uses long comples sentences in a language where the
sentence in a ‘literary’ (carefully worked) style is usually comples and longer than in
40 Appeounhet to trunslutine

the TL, the translator may reduce the sentences tomewhat, compromtstng between the noemt of the tcso tanguaget and the snritee. If tn doubt, hossee’en, he thacldtrcst
the ‘ceitet. not the ‘tanguage’, ashich it atom of abstracttent. A temattttctranttattoe
ceeecectc. Than when faced with:
Doe Cietichtspcnkt den Nutatichkeit ist gettde tn Beeug oat etn sotchot hetites
H oeacsqcetfen obeestee nang-otdnendet, ecng-abhebendet Wertcntetle to feemd
cod cnangemessrn win moglich; hiet ist eben das Gefuhl hot etnem Gegeosatee
ones niedeigen WStmegtados angelcngt, den tede berechnende Ktcghett. edee
Niitolichkeit-Katkct sotacssetet’
(Zcr Geneatogie do’ Metal, (2) Nictetchc)
the translator has to cling to words, cotlocations, strttctunes, emphases:
The ctilitanianpoiotofeiowisasaltenattdinapPeoPrtate anttposstblycoold be
ptecisoly to such an intense eruption of supnnme rank-ctasstfytng, rank
disctiminating satuc-jcdgements: hone in fact feeling has eeachod the antithests of
the low degnen of fenvone presumed in esery type of calccfatingclesenness. esery
assessmnnt of utility.’ (My sorsion.)
Thcs a translation is always closer to the original than any intnaltnguaf rendrrtng on
paraphrase misnamnd ‘translation’ by George Steiner (1975), and therefore it ts an
indinpennabte toot far a somcntician and new a phifesephee. Communtcatise and
semantic translation may wet I coincide—in particular, where the test canseys a
genre at rather than accttcrally (temporally and spatially) bocnd message and where
the matter ices important as the manner—notably then in the translation of the most
important rrligiocs, philosophical, artistic and scientific tests, assuming second
readers as informed and interested as the first, Farther, there are oft en sec lions in one
test that mutt be translated communicatisely (e.g. rten’liea—’nonsuit’), and others
srmasticalfy (e.g. a qcetatioc from ospeech). Therein no one communicatise nor one
semantic method of translating a test—these are in fact widrly osrnlapping bands of
methods. A translation can be more, or less, semantic—mote, on less,
tisr’—esen a particular section ot sent ener can hr terated mete communicatisely at
less semantically. Thus in some passages, 0. Hoane and G. Nowell Smith (1971) state
that: ‘we feel it preferable to choose fidelity oser good English, despite its awkwandnrss,
in siew of the importance of sown concepts in Gramsci’s work.’ Each method has a
common basis in analytical ot cognitise translation which is built up both proposition
by preposition and word by word, denoting the empirical factouf knowledge 0f the
test, but finally nespecting lbe consenlion of the target language pnosidrd that the
thocght-ctntrnt of the test has been trprodccrd. The translation emerges in such
way that the esact meaning or function of the words only become apparent as they are
used. The translator may base to muke interim decisions without being able at the
time to sisuuliee the relation 0f the words with the end product. Communicatise and
semantic tecuslatian bifurcate at a 1dm stage of analytical or cngnitisr translation,
which isa pretranslation procedure which may hr preformed on the sourcrlanguage
test to consent it into the source on the target language—the resultant sessions will be
closer to each other than the original test and the final translation.
 Commanieatoe and semantic transtatioe II 41

In principle, cognitive translation transposes the SL text grammattcully to plate

version,

sequences of: ‘an agent (subject) does (active serb) something (direct object) to at
for someone (indirect object) with something (instrumental) somewhere (locative) sometime (temporal) to make something (resultant)’—addit onulty. an agent object
maycosored
be in a satieorcaneealed
ty of relatsonshtps with anotbyhertheagentEnglish
object (possessipreposition
ve. dependency, sour‘of’),
ce, partitwhteh
ise, feustive,must
churucterishetic, etspelt
c.) (relatiooat
nships tnaftco
cl,tuse. Thus the grammatical meaning of the SL text becomes expltcit. Further,
eognttit’e translation splits up the word-class derivatives, i.e. adverbs (= peepositton
+ adfectise + noun), adjectival nouns (e.g ‘whiteness’), qualitying prefix-verb-nouns
(e.g. ‘contribution’), noun-verbs (e.g. ‘to ration’), noan-adtective-vetb’nouns (e.g.
etc., into their components and explicates the relations of all
multiple noun compounds (e.g. ‘data acquisition coutrol system’: system to control the
acquiring of data). Further, it replaces figurutise and colloquial language, idioms and
pt’..asul serbs with denotutise teems; cleats up lexical and grammatical ambiguities;
interpolates relevant encyclopaedic information fat ecological, cultural and institutional
terms; replaces pronouns with nouns and identifies referential synonyms;
reduces cultural terms to their functional definitions; and analyses the semantic
features of any words that are likely to be split into two or three words when
translated. Thus at far axis possible (the process is artificial) the testis removed teem
its natural cultural and lisguixtic axis to an artificial neutral universal plane of
largaagr.

Nida in his admirable analysis of grammatical meaning )1974a, pp. 47—49) approaches
eognitis’e trasslarion somewhat differently, prrferring to split surf ace struc lures into
separate underlying )pres’iousty concealed) sentences. Thus hr analyses: ‘their former
director thought their journey was a deeeprios’ into: (a) he directed them formerly
(b) he thought X (the entire following expression), (c) they journeyed, (d) they
drceisedY(wishousspeeilyingwhoYis), addingan analyxisoftherelarionshipberween
)e) and (d)—e.g. means-result: by journeying they deceived’, means-purpose (they
journeyed in order to deceive), additise rvests (they jnunreyed and they deceived).
For cognitive translation, I think: ‘The man who used to be their director (to direct
them) thought theyhad travelled to deceive (by travelling they had deceived, they had
travelled and deceived)’ is adequate. Another (more likely?) alternative missed by
Nida must be added: ‘The man who used to be their direetnr thought they had merely
pretended to travel, in order to deceive others.’ (Must verbal soans may be active or
passive in meaning.)

It is not usually necessary to make a fall cognitive translation, a procedure similar to

Brislsn’s (1976) ‘dreentring’. Where the cultures of two languages have been in
contact toe centuries, the translator soemally resorts to cognitive translatios only for obscure, ambiguous or complex passages. A cognitive trasslalion may serve as a
ter-tium compar-uriosin between texts with distant cultures and radically different
language structures
42 Approaches to translation

Wher cognitvetranslationresultsinupo clywritencod/cr epetice test,com unicatis’etranslationrequiresaboldatempt oclarifyandreorganizeif.Atextsuchasthefol wingwouldrequireconsiderablereweitngbeforeilstranslated:

‘If industrialists are so keen foe Britain to join why does not the Government make

iont possiM.ble foDebré’s

e those who wantweed
to get intosteer
Earope wioily
thout ththai
e sactihcetheto BntCommon
ish sovereignty whiMarket
ch must be thise ineviunwerkuble
table result of oue joiwithout
ning if we are totherely
Treaty of Rome’
(The Times, 18 July 1961, quoted in The Use of English, R. Quirk, Lorgmaos, 1964.)
Proposed rewrite:

‘As indusirialists are so keen, why does oat the Government make it possrble for
Britain to get into Europe without sacrificing her sovereignty? Accerdsng to M.
Debré’s recent statement, this would first require amendments to the Treaty of
Rome, which is the legal instrument governing the Common Murket.’

tam assuming that whilst a semantic translation is always inferior In its original, since
it involves loss of meaning, a communicative translation may be better, since it may
gain in furer and clarity what it leses in semantic content. lix communicative
Ii hI It tyg h wlggiwi lilbith th
gI q) h p 4 g h wll hi hdf ml f
pod I mlii mm 1 h h gfi
mp th lg p1 imywtb Ig I II I I y
If, ,,t m b I t Im I p 1 dl Ilgyl liteth
fem.luk_jylepl f mbgytmdfy dlfyjg ( 4
loose geseric terms to rather ma re concrete components), and to noetoialjoe bizarre.
ejcsofLdiolecl, i.e. wayward uses of language. Further, one has the right Incorrect
mistakes of félitand slips, nermally stating what one has done in a footnote. (All such
corenclions and improvements are usually inodmissible in semantic translation.)

In theory a communicative translation is ipsofacro a subjective procedure, since it is

_jxcJjCfj/T h et if d m 4 mh h II W
uniT b.vgofZct by rv y f th m 1 4/ phy I I I f ‘I
initially as constrained by the form, the structures and words of Ilte original as a
semantic translation (the pee-translation process) until tIre version is gradually skewed
to the reader’s point of view. Then the trauslalne starts to ask himself whether his
version is ‘happy’, i.e. a successful ‘act’, rather than whether it is true, i.e. an exact
statement (cf. Austin, 1962). He begins In extend Ihe unit of translation, having
secured the referential basis, i.e. the truth of the informatins; he views words and
phrases in expanding waves in their linguistic context, restructuring orreareurging
clauses, reinforcing emphases. Nevertheless, each lexical and grammatical unit has in
remain accounted foe—thai is his Aniueun link with the texl.
 Commaninatine and semantic translation (I) 43

In one senne, communicative translation, by adapting and making the thought and
coaentotthe oniginal tease accessible to the reader, gwen semantictranslation
00fs05 dimension, The Leipoig School, notably Neabert a Ku , have leered to tins
the ‘pragmatic’ etentert. but Itbink this isa little misleading. To begin with Pcirceand
notably Moerisdetined ‘pragntatics’ as the branch ottem,oticsthat deatswith the relation
between signs or tinguittic espeessiont and theie users (transmitters and receptors).
Ceiumunicali c’etran station, h0rsee,ioncennodmainlywiththnteceptot5,tytn

tcaltueeasdtaiheueemsofhislanguage.
he coolest at a language and cultural variety, whilst semantic translation is concerMoreover’peagmatic’isaconfusingteem,sinCe
ned with the transmit er usually as an individual, and otter in conteadistinction both to his
even in the contest of translation (let atone its abundant senses in philosophy) it is also
used in the sense of ‘nonliterary’, ‘technical’ and ‘pnacticat’. Neubeet and Kade base
maintained that the pragmatic (in the semioticsense) is the variant, difficult and often
‘untranslatable’ element in translation, whilst the cognitive (the material basis and
environment) is invaeiant, eelatively easy and always translatable. Whilst this view
obviouslyhassometeuth(theobjectice, physicatandconceete beingonthe wholeeasier
to translate than the subjective, mental and figurative), it ignores the indisputable
proportion of tnuth to the Humboldt thesis (the weak thesis) that each language has its
nwsdistinctivestnucture,reflectingandconditioningthewaysofthoaghtand espression
ofthepeopteusirgit,butfoewhiehtranslationwoatdbraneasybusiness. Farther,this
view hardly comes to terms with thr tart that most material objects derive their names
from thr resutt of mental analogies and comparisons, that is, from metaphor, not from
any scientigic madetnmeusurr neotogisms, and that all languages are mitful and
different in their namingotsnmr of the commonrstphysicatabjeets. Lyons (t976) and
Weightman(t9b7) have independently shown how inadequate oroverloaded would be
any translation into French of the apparently simple, observational, objective,
non-’pragmatie’sentence’Thecatsatonthemat’. BoththeFeenchveesion(possibly, ‘Le
chat étuit urrenapi sorb pailtassen’) and the rathrrbettre Germ an seesion (‘Die Katee
hockte auf dee Fulfdeeke’) ate oserteunstations, illustrating Ftench and German’s tack of
ssnrds of sufficient generality and consequentty of equivalent trequency. On the other
hand, there are many cases where the ‘pragmatic’ etement ear be translated without
difficulty, provided the viewpoint represented in the SL culture is melt understood by the
reader of the trarstation: thus words like ‘revisionist’, ‘terrorist’, ‘patriotic’, ‘peoleta.
sian’, ‘formalistic’, etc., canbe ‘ugneed’ accordingtothenational culture intheeducated
writing uf many woeld’languages. A GDR teem such as Abgreszen (retusat to
compeomisemith non.nocialistpotieies), though it is apragmutic ‘hot potato’, can usually
be satety translated without any ot the three points of view (the transmitter’s, the
recrptnr’s,shetranstatoe’s)obtesdingonthemessage. Fordager(lf75),the’pragmutie
element’ is what transforms a ‘semantic’ (i.e. cognitive) into a ‘functional’ (i.e.
communicative) trunstatinn—tike mast ot the tinguistic theorists, he only accepts the
validity ot communicative (his ‘functional’) transtution and implicitly downgrades

mould prefer to avoid the use of the teem ‘pragmatic’ and to regard both
commontcatsve and semantic an divergent retinements or revisions ot cognitive
44 Approaches to translatior

translation. In both cases, the cognitive element may soon have so be abandoned,
since the TLview of the same referent (objector message) may dtfferfram the SL (cf

châteaud’eau-.—’wate tower’;pasdedanget’—’notlikely!’).Thetransitontosemantictranslation ormalyreducestheunitoftranslation,andbeingsthetextclosertothefigurativeandformale mentsoftheorignal,secludingwher pos ibleits ound

effects. Therefore the trot becomes more idiosyncratic and ‘sensitive’. Length of

ssource
entences, howevand
er long ortarget
shoes, positlanguages
on and integrity of clause(which
s, woed-posstsalso
oo foe emphashave
is, are prtoeserbeved, unlconsidered,
es the divergence betweenalthough
the relevant normstheof the
individual writer’s ‘style’ finally prevails) is extensive. The transition to communicative
translation normally makes the test smoother, lighter, more tdsomatsc and easier
to read. Syntas is remodelled, commoner collocations and more usual words are
found. Semantic translution is basically addressed to one ‘reader’ only, namely, the
weiteroftheSLtest,withtheassumptionthathecanreadtheTLandwiltbethebest
arbiter of the translation’s quality.

Since the overriding factor in deciding how to translate is the intrinsic importance of
every semantic unit in the lest, it follows that the vast majority of tests require
communicative rusher than semantic translation. Moss non-literary wrifing, journalism,
informative articles and books, trutbooks, reports, scientific and technological
writing, non-personal correspondence, propaganda, publicity, public cotices, standardried
writing, popular fiction—the ran-of-the-mill tests which have to be translated
today but were nut translated and in most cases did not exist a hundred years
ago—comprise typical material suitable foe commanicatire translation. On the ether
hand, original expression, where the specific language of the speaker or writer is as
important as the content, whether it is philosophical, religious, political, scientific,
technical or literary, needs to be translated semantically. Any important statement
requires avers ion as close to the original lexical and grammatical structures as is
obtainable. Thus Spears’ )l9bb) translation of the following passages of Dr Gaulle’s
18 June t941l broadcast is unacceptable:

‘Infiniment plus que tear nombre, cc soul let chars, los aviona, Ia tactique
des Allemands qui nous font recutre. Ce soot leo chars, Irs avions, Ia tactique
des Allemands qai ont suepeis not chefs au point do los amonee là 00 its
en soot aujourd’hui. .

‘It was the tanks, the planes and the tactics of the Germans, far more than the fact
that we were outnumbered, that forced oar armies to retreat. It was the German
tanks, planes and tactics that provided the element of surprise which brought oor
leaders to them present plifht.’

(Suggested version:

‘Far, far mare than their numhros, it was the tanks, the planes and the tactics of the
Germans that caused us to retreat. It was the tanks, the planes and the tactics
 Communicatioe and semantic translation II) 45

of the Germans that took oat Iradets by sunpnse and that hronght them to the
ttate they are in today.’)
‘Cae Ia Feanco nest Patton to! Ette nest pat scale! Elto nest pat scale!’
‘Foe remember this, France does not stand atone. She is not notated.’
(Suggested version:
‘Foe France is not atone! She is not atone! She ts not atone!’)

tn those and other passages, Spears has attempted to modify the starkness, simpttctly and ran’ness of Dr Gantle’s speech. (As a communicative translation of a narrat s’e,
Spears’s first paragraph is valid, bnt the translation of qaotattons, however nnimpor’
is normatly semantic rather than eommanicative, since the translator is not
rrsponsiblrfarthrirrffrcton thrsrcond reader.)
Aatobiography, private correspondence, any personal effusion rrqutrrs semantic
treatment, since the ‘intimate’ flavonr of the original is more important than its effect
on the reader.

One would normally roped to tranntatr serious titeratare (high art) semanticatly, bat
onr has to bear in mind that aft art is to a grratrr or lesser rstrnt allegorical,
figuration, metaphorical and a parablr, and therefore has a commnnicative parpose.
Figurative langnagr only becomes mraningfut, if it is nrcreatrd in the mntaphors of
thr target tanguage and its culture, on, if this is not possible, reduced to its sense. to
the case of minor literature that is ctosely bound to its period and its culture (short
stories in particular), semantic translation will attempt to preserve its local flavour—
dialect, stang and culturat terms (motn-témoina) will present their own problems. In
the case of works with universal themes (e.g. love lyrics) and a background that is
simitar for SL and TL (say, in ecology and living conditions), there is no reason why a
basicatty semantic teanstation should not atso hr strongly communicative. Bibte
transfusion should be both semantic and communicative, utthough the ‘modern’
preference (Schwarz, 1970) for ‘phitotogicat’ unopposed ta ‘inspirational’ translation
has for tong moved away from studies which regarded the test us inspired and
untouchable. Nida has shown in his many books that the TL read cc can only accept
the geographical and historical remoteness 0f the cultural background being
presented to him, if that behaviour itself and all imagery connected with it is recast in
his own (modern) culture. tn fact, as the myths recrde and tess knowledge can be
expected from modern man, each new translation of the Bible becomes mote
communicative, with the omission of technical terms, dialect and slung, and directed
at increasing numbers of less-well-read people. Again, the immediate communicative
importance of drama is usually greater than that of poetry or of serious fiction, and for
this reason adaptations (where characters and milieu are transferred) are sometimes
made, whilst they are almost unknown in the novel. However, in the most concentrated
drama (Shakespeare, Chekhov) the essence of which is that words are packed
or charged with meaning, semantic takes precedence over cowmanicative
equivalence, since the translator assumes that the dramatist has made use of his
resources so give his language communicative potential; it is now the
translator’s task to estracs the utmost semantic equisatence from the original. Again,
46 Appronshes to

where the medium (i.e. the form) is an important as the message, and the peoples of
the two tanguage cuttures can nonmally say the same thtsgs usssg dstferest words, the
two etements fate.

St is not atways possibte testate which is the better meshed to use feet paettcutar test. In a mainly tefeemato’e test, the sectson cotstatetng eecommendatsens, snstructsons,
value-judgements, etc. may he transtated meee communscatis’ely than the descrtpttt’e
passages. Whets language is used to accompany action or as tts symbot (speech-acts),
it is treated communicatively, whilst definitions, esplanations, etc. ate
‘Stundurdieed losguage’ most always be translated communscottvely, whether a
standardieed equit’alent esists on not, even if it appears so a novel on a quotatton,
unless the teem is used desceiptively rather than opeeutit’ely so the orsgtnal test.

Normally in commuetcatite translation it is assumed that the neaders of the translation

identify with those of the oniginal. Howes’ee, this is unlikely when elements of the
source tunguage culture or of the source tanguage itself are discussed in the test.
Nes’ertheless, ‘communication’ is as important here as in a test where the subject-
matter is ng general interest. Where, say, an institution of the SL community is being
described, a speciat meaning of a SL word is used or the double meaning of a
hottsophenr ue homonym is bring espteited, the teunslator, sf he thtnks the point
sufficientty important, has to render the author’s message communicatis’rly and atso
address himself independently to the TL reader; in short, he haste ‘make’ the pun us
as esptain it. He has to assess (a) the estent 0f his reader’s knowledge of and
interest is the relevant aspect of the source language or cutture, (b( the test’s tes’el of
speciatism. If he is writing for the geneeat reader, he may be abte to achieve his
purpose by transcribtng the appropriate new SL terms unlikely to be familiar to hts
render and adding their upprosimatc cuttunat equivalents (e.g. Fachhochechule on
‘potytechnic’). tf the terms are not likely to recur, he may decide not to transcribe
them. tf the test is speciatited, the translator may wish to give his reader ott possible
totormation, inetuding the transcription, the cuttural equivalent, the encyclopaedic
definition wsthin the source cutture and the titerut translation of any new term on the
best occasion of its use. He may even propose a ‘translation abet’, i.e. a word used in
a new sense, provided he states that he is doing so, and he believes the object or
concept is tikety to recur in the TL usage. (Thus Volket’at, second chamber, regional
assembly in GDR, ef. Bundenrat in FRG, People’s Councit, National Council.) Or
again, tf ‘Hying planes can be dangerous’ is to be translated, the double meaning has
to be esptuined in the TL with SL illustrations. All that is lost is vividness. Finally,
whilst ambtguity, potysemy, word-ptay, etc. in titreary works have to be repeoduced
usbesttheycanintheTLonly(inpoeteyandptaysitisa’hitormiss’procedure_..in
prose fiction there is room for brief espunsion), such facts of tanguuge when discussed
to soo-ltteeaey works (e.g. on tanguage, criticism, psychology) must be fully
reproduced to the SL and esplained in the TL. This has been superbly done by James
Steachey in his translation 0f Freud’s Jokes and their Relation to the Utseonoctous
(1975) (his introduction contains valuable comments). The bnok had been previously
transtated by A. A. Beill as Wit and leo Relation to the Unconociouo and many
esamptes of word-play replaced by analogous English ‘equivalents’, a spurious
 Cemmuniestier ted ssmartin tttrrslatiutt (ii 47

procedure, sinco the teanslator gase noesideece of atty patient eset husteg mode such
word-slips or puns tn English.
In the following passage on iherapeutic methods in eheumatology, ‘La mobilssatson
see des bases londamentales do teaitement des maladies osteo-aeticulaiees.
On parle aussi do kinossiherapie acte’o oa do cinesitherapie. ou do gymsastsque
theeapoutique; cc sort des synorymes’, the teanslatoe may gise the two or mote
English equivalents, possibly acute kiresitberapy’ and ‘remedial enercises , adding,
ifhe wishos, that in French the following threc teems ate u5ed’. In all the abose cases
the normal goiv of communicative translation is interrupted foe his own readees by
the translator’s glosses, which araaaombinaiion of transcription and semantic

Logal documents also require a special type of translation, basically because the
is ma to rostriciad than in any other form. Esory word has to ho rendered,
diffeeences in terminology md fcectiau rorad, and us much attention paid to the
as to rho intention and all possible interpretations and mivinterprelations of
the text—all legal rants are definitions, Adorno noted—ihus the semantic aspect;
errorihrlexx. rho standard format, syrras, archaisms, as wolf as the formal register of
the TL, must be respected in dealirg with documents that are to be concurrently saId
in the TL m.iimmunity (EEC law, contracts, intcrnational agreements,
patrnrs)—hrnce the communicative aspect. Legal documents translated for metormation
purposes only (foreign laws, wills, eonseyaneing) hose to be semantically
translated.

A semantic translation attempts to recreate the precise flavour and tone ot ihe
nriginat: the words are ‘sacred’, nor because they are more important than the
rentent, but because form and content are one. The thought-processes in the words
are as significant as the intention behind the words in a aommunicatis’e translation
Thus a semantic translatron ix out of time and local space (but has to be done again
every generation, if still ‘salid’(, where a communicatise translation is ephemeral and
rented in its content. A semantic translation attempts to preserve its author’s idiolect,
his peculiar format expression, in preference to the ‘spirit’ of the source or the target
language. It rrlatrs to Biahler’s ‘espressise’ function nt language, where communicative
translation responds to the represerrational (Dat’nrellung( and vocative (Appell(
functions. In semantic translation, every word translated represents some loss of
meaning (e.g. the lass of sound and rhythm in the word-for-word translation of the Dr
Gaulle speech previously quotrd(, where in communicative trarslation the same
wnrds similarly translated lose no meaning at all. Thr syntax in semantic
which gives the text its stresses and rhythm—the foregrourdmng’ as the Prague School
calls it—is as sacred as the words, being basically subject only to the standard
transpositions (Vinay and Darbelnet) or shifts (Catford) from one language to
another. There ix a constant temptation, which should be rrxistrd, to transcribe the
trrms nor key-concepts or theme words

The closer the cultural overlap between the two languages—this overlap bring more
mmportantihanihrsrructuealalfsniryarrfregeographicalpropinqumtyofthe two
languages, but the translator’s empathy being the most important factor 0f all—the
closer, therefore better, the translation is likely to be. This applies particularly to legal
48 Approaches to

and administratir’e tests, sshere the names of instituttons pecohar to one

community are frequently not tranttated, unless they are atso important in the TL
or ate transparently transtatabte, sshitst the names of instituttons ssith easity
idontihablr TL cottairat equisatents term part of each language’s readtlyconcertible’
‘transtation stock’ (Rabin, t966(. In communicate/c translation, hoaeser, the message’
is ott important, and the essential thing isto make the reader look, feel ardor
act. There shoatd be no toss of moaning, and the aim, sshich is oft or roatieed, is to make the translation more effectise as ascII as more elegant than the original. A
translation seorks on a narron’ basts. It is ‘tailor-made’ for one
category of readership, does one job, fulfils a particular function A semantic
translation is nide and onisersal. In attempting to respond to the aalhor, 10mg or
dead, it addrrssos itsett to alt readers, all uho hcce ears to hear, or fail to Stendhal’s
‘happy fees’.

My last comparison ccitt take metaphor as its touchstone.

I herr propose to abandon thr consentionat clumsy I. A. Richards’s terminology of
sehicle/tenor and to our my oicn, ciz. metaphor object image sense Thou in a ‘sunny
smilr’ she metaphor is ‘sunny’, the object is ‘smile’, the image (cehiclo) is the ‘son’,
thrsrnsr (tenor) is perhaps ‘cherefol’, ‘happy’, ‘bright’, ‘isarm’ (‘isarm’ is also a
metaphor. hot moer fossilized). Note this in a stock metaphor ohich normally has a
narross band of ‘object’ (r.g. look—mood—disposition).
Metaphor, as Dagut (1976) has pointrd out in a brilliant arttclr, has been much
neglresed in the literature. I propose to discans three types of metaphor: dead
(fossilized), standard (stock) and original (creatice). (The types are clearly dotingaishablr
at thnir crntres, but they mrrgr ssith each other at the periphery.) All
tanguages consist of a stock of more or less fossilized metaphors Many rem ssords are
metaphors. Onr has only to compare the collocations for thr main parts of the body
(say Fuji, pied, foot) so see that esen in thrir commonest uses they ore not all
inter-transtatabte. (Further, their precise physical areas do not coincide.) tn some
cases the translator has to eoosrrt from a dead metaphor (F:fi’onr) to a transparent
one (‘forehead’) or to a concrete isord (G: Stir-ne). Though there is often an area of
choice, sheer is not usually a dsstinction here betsseen communicarise aud semantic
teanstation, although one coold for instance maintain that figure is a more semantic
translation of ‘face’ than rinage or face. Normally dead metaphors, bring farthest
remosed front their sourer, are the easiest metaphors to teonslate, and their figneatise
aspect is ignored in SL and TL (e.g. er’o’dgen=posder) usless it is res’ised by an
estended image (e.g. ‘neigh up in my personal scale’).
There are fire possiblo procedures in translating standard, i.e. more or less common,
metaphors, sshich may be simple (one steed) or entended (idioms). In making a
decision, the translator has to neigh each option against the eelahse trequency (and,
therelore,natuealness)and eoreertcyoftheTLequo’alentisithistheappeopriate
language sariety. The first solution is to translate by a metaphor using the same or a
usmilar image (n’ehicle) (‘a ray of hope’; em Hoffrsungostr’ahl); the second ss to
 CosnsnanicatioO and semantic translation (I) 49

translate with a different imafe that has the same sense (acood’auteeo chatt dfotarttet’:
ta hate ather fish ta fry’); the third is to consent the metaphor eta a stmtle; the
ffifth
ourth intinto
o quatifytranslate
the simite with thase sensmachas
e (c’eot an (ton possible
= ‘hots as bran’e ofas a the
t on whisense
ch in commuoibehtnd
catis’e trausttheatios maytmago,
be ads’isabtther, if thesense
metaphor tshemp
obscure; the
the common area between tho metaphors object and the mage, as seen by the wetter
and interpreted by the teanstator. The question of whether to use semanttc or
translation will arise only when the translator is tn doubt about which
solution to adopt. Thus (pace Reins) a ‘storm in a tea-cup’ will normally be translated
as une sempête danounces’s’e d’eau or em Stuem im Waooes’glao, whatever the contest,
aslonfasthethreeidiOmsrrmaiooqually currrntwithinthatcontrst. Communscatranslation
may prefer ‘a lot of fuss about nothing’ etc., a semantic ttanslatton ‘a
mountain out of a molehill’ when the ‘storm in a tea-cup’ becomes too well-morn.
Therein also a case for eliminating a few clichés masquerading as metaphor or idioms
in a poorly written test requiring communicative treatment. Further, the decision
whethen to translate ‘as cool as acucumbor’ by o’anqui((e comme Baptiste )pelorattve)
or acec unaang-froidpasfait(impes’tut’bable, oupes’be, etc.) may depend on whether a
semantic or communicative translation respectively is more appropriate.
Creative metaphor, as Dagut, quoting Richards (1965), poinss out, is ‘the constitutive
form of language’. Further, it isa much commoner phenomenon than those who think
otitasthrpresrrvrofportsmightimagine,anditisoftrnthemost accurateand
concise descriptive instrument in language, as opposed to mathematics. Notoriously,
translators know that it is found most commonly in the financial columns of
newspapers: ‘Milton Krynrn’s commercial beacon. . . . The ticket on which the
tows sells itself . . . the start of the slow clamber back, or a brief holiday window
between two years9 no check in the path to sell long gilts. . . the newlong tapless
attractive. . . . Mercifully (cf. hopefully, thankfully, gratefully)’ (Guardian, 39 Dec.
1976). Dagut also quotes from a recent issue of Time magaoine: ‘Mrs Thatcher shacks
off her gloves and barrels into battle.’ Whether one translates the images or the sense
0f these phrases will depend first on whether this figurative language is equally
appropriate in the TL, and, secondly, on how important sod espresuive, in the
translator’s opinion, the image is semantically (ifit is not important, he will translate it
communicatively).
Assuming that acerative metaphor is worth translating, their is no question that the
more original and surprising it is (and therefore the more remote trom the national
culture), the easier it will be to translate, since in its essence it will be remote from
common semantic as well as cultural associations. For this reason, Kloepfer’s (1967)
dictam so disapprosingly quoted by Dagut, ‘Jr kuhner and freier erfiinden, je
einmaligrr nor Metapher ist, dents leichier ldBt sir sich in andens Sprachen
wiederholen’, is perfectly valid. The difficulties arise when the metaphors are not so
inseotise (Dagut qnotes ‘she killed off the free milk programme’, which is not a
metaphor in his esclusivrly creative sense at all, and which could perhaps be
translated by a polysemous word such as acheces’ or tars’), and here Dagut rightly
states ihat ‘the translatability of a metaphor is determined by the estent to which the
cultural (i.e. referential) esperience and semantic (linguistic) associations on which it
draw sore shared by speakers of the particular TL’. The esamples he gives (literal and
50 Approanhes to

semantic trunsfution feom Hebeeis into English) ace tel ing. Hoiseser, ho strangely tails to mention the third factor 0g unisersaf or estracultural osperience. ishich
makes teunslation of metaphor relatis’ely easy. prosided the seoiantic rouge of the
eetesunt ssoeds are fairly congruent. Thus, in the fol ossing hoes feom E. E Cummings )19b3) )from ‘if t hare made, my lady intncate’), ‘the cocci small clumsy
feet of Apeit came into the cogged meudon’ of my soul’. ‘foci’ is sirtually eatracultucal,
in conteast isith ‘April’ whose connotations freshness. siseotnoss, shoisors,
unfolding of buds and blossoms, etc.) are restricted to the temperate tcgiaos of the
Noetheen Hemisphere. and ‘meadois’ ishose osist000e )ard therefore connotations)
is also )difgeeently) geographically circumscribed. Of Ihesu lhree mctaphors. ‘foot
conld be translated into any language. hot ‘April’ and ‘moodois’ isould he subjoct to
)i.e. ecological) consteuints. )t beliese that certain physical and natural
objects—and certain mathematical, physical and moral laos are a prior’s and therefoee
estracuttoral, and they are at least less accaltura’ ted lbanatherohecrsard
lows. The meanings of objects and concepts are apprehended partly ir us far as boy
ace unis’ers at oe common to all cultures, partly in as far as thoy farm part of a
particular cnltuer, and partly through indisidual perception.) Note that acreatise
metaphor is normally difficult enough to translate without the translator being able
to account foe sound-effect )us in the abos’e-mentiooed Timi’ quotation) unless the
sonnd-etfect ‘is more important than’ )i.e. is) the sense. If the metaphor includes a
neologism (hot ‘shuck’ and ‘barrel’ are American English). the translator mast
create his own neologism in semantic, but not normally in communicatise

Nenbeet han snggested that ‘Shall t compare thee to a summer’s day?’ )s0000tro.
XVIII, W. Shakespeare) could not be semantically translated into a language
spoken in a conntry whore summers are unpleasant. This is not so, sioco the cruder
shontd get a sisid impression from the content of hr sonnet of the boauty of
summer in England, and reading the poem should esercise his imagination as well as
fntrodnce him to Engtish culture. A communicatise translation into a Middle East
fangnage would certainty require a different imagery and a new poem. Howesor. one
coutd annume that all serious poems shonld be semantically translated and that the
more original the metaphor, the more disconnected it is from its culture and
therefore the more its originality can be presetsed by a literal translation

The Iranstalion of a metaphor may be atone-told process: the source language term
(e.g. ferme) cottocuted with i’i.tage feuds to the image ‘closed’ which leads to ‘wood’
which leads to ‘wooden face’, The fone elements )SL term: SL image: TL imugr; IL
term) depict the sense and quality of lifelessness and hardness. These are the
cnuventionaf processes of communicatise translation.

Laugnage has veebn, adjectir’en and adsorbs that refer naturally to peesons, but may
he transferred in sum reuses to ubtects )e g ‘it’s killing’; ‘the price is famously high’;
‘stunned sarpeise’). Similurfy, most tunguuges hare ambiguous words such us ‘frost,
stock, harvest’ which in tome contents may be either conceete or ftgoeatise orosen
both. At times a sentence may ever be on three levels, sic, specific, generic and
figurative, e.g.
 Cornmanieatioe and semantic translation Ii) 51

‘Le devenir du mfdicament conditionne ‘action pharmacologique.’

‘The rate of absorption of drugs determtnes their uctton.’
‘The development of drugs determines their action.’
‘The future of drugs will determine she scope und impoeiunce of phurmacotogy.

tn ull these cases, a commuoicuiive trunstution wilt tend tobe the eustest verston thut in consonunt wish the function of the utterunce, whilst u semanttc trunstat on wttl
uitempi to embrace the total meuning. To sum up, metuphors ure not affected by the
semuntic—commonicative urgument when they huve standuedized TL equivalents: in

othcr eases they ore translated semantically, but with some allowance for dtf erent cultures if they ore original and important; communicatively, emphastzing or
esplicuting their sense, in most othcr eases.

It maybe objected that communicative translation should always be semantic and that
semantic translation should always be communicative. I do not think this is possible.
There isa contradiction, an opposition, at best an overlapping between meaning and
message—when both are equ ally pursued. Sf, like Darbelnet, one believes that ‘Ia
traduction mi l’opération qui consiste a faire passer dune langue dunn one autre tons
let étdmrnts dr srns dun passage rt rim qur srs ritdments, en s’usnurunt quits
eonsrrvent dans Ia langue d’arrivde true importance relative, ainsi que lear tonatild, et
en tenant compir des differences qur prrisentent entre riles irs cultures ausquettes
correspondent resprctivrmmnr Ia tangur dr depart et Ia langue d’arrivée’—communication
appears to have no place. On the other hand, following Nida’s ‘Translating is
communicating’ with its emphasis on a readable (instantly?), understandable test
(although Nida also insists on accuracy and fidelity), one notices inevitably agreut loss
of meaning in the dropping of so many Biblical metaphors which, Nida insists, the
read or cannot understand.

The translation theorist has to raise the question, in considering Nida’s dynamic
equivalence, not only of the nature (education, clans, occupation, age, etc.) of sIte
readers, bat of what into be rsprcted of them. Are they to be handed everything on
plate? Are they to make any effort? Are the yrver espec ted to took a word up in a
dictionary or an encyclopaedia? t have no wish to question the uppropriutrnrss of tbr
Good Newt Bible translation, and obviously the translation of any performatives
(public notices, etc.) must also be instantly intelligible. However, tam writing against
sIte increasing assumption that aft translating is (nothing but) communicating, where
the lens effort enpecled of the reader, the better.

The fact is, as any translator knows, meaning is complicated, many-levelled, a

‘network of relations’ as devious as the channels of thought in the brain. The more
communication, the wore generalization, the more simplification—the less meaning.
One is most aware of meaning when one is thinking, or, lobe more precise, when one
is silently talking to oneself, that process of internalized or inieriorized language one
engages in when one thinks, but for which no language appears to have a word. (It is
supplemented by the formation 0f images.) But as soon as one writes or speaks, one
starts toning meaning—the images disappear, the words are constcoctrd into
52 Appruachen ts trarsiatiur

clauses—and when ose channels and paints ane’s cammanscattan, a arder to make 1
effectis’e, towards one ora grasp af receptars, anecanftnes ann’s nneansng even mane.
Whnn the third stagn is reaclsed—translating, the cammunscatsan into another
tangnage—thnre is ares farther Sass of meaning. The clash between communtcattOn
and meaning can be illustrated by the difference between say affectanl lesfnncltans
amndniqaes and ‘affecting the functians af memary’, raters regulters el facsllatsfs,
‘narmal and special trains’, ca 10 regardo and ‘that’s his laakost’—tu all cases, the
message is thr same (perhaps?) but Sheer is a dif erence in meaning such as Darbelurt wauld perhaps refute to recognior. Again, it has been pointed out too often that the
teems BroS. pain, bread way hare different meanings in the three languages sf one is
thinking of lbesarocr, the shape, the campasitian, the impuntance at lhss food, bssl if
one asks asupplier to scud a hundred bases of bread, the message is an effective act
cammunicatiun, and counoralious are likely tube neglected. The contrast can be made
mast ulrussgly and paradosically, ill say that the mare I sasaur the meautug of a word
in all its richness, relating it to its object and its cassssatations, the less I am inclsurd to
cammunicate, bring absorbed—whilst if Imunt tocummunicate, Ideal wish meaning
as its narramest, nharpest, most concise—in fact, ideally, meaning is just a refles or an

A message, therefore, is unty a pant of a complete meuning, just as a word, say,

‘table’, anly cavern a small part, isa mere label (a ‘flat stub or board’, a metaphar for
a tavern?) far she whole object. Cummunication has a similar retatian to language as
fnncliann has to slrucsure. Language, like structure, like ‘global’ meaning, is rich,
diverse, many-layered: anee ann thinks uf a message, a cammunication, a function,
She ntseeance becomes sharp, thin, direct. Chomsky (t976) denies that language is
primarily eammunicalix’e, and emphasizes that in ‘canlemplatian, inquiry, normal
sacial interchange, planning and guiding one’s awn aclians, creative writing, honest
self-exprnnsian, and numerous other activities wish language, exprrsvious are used
wish their slnict linguistic meaning irresprctive at the intentions of the ‘aIrmen” with
regard so an audiencc’ (p. 69). Transferring this dislinclion, I suggest that for most
of she linguissic activities mentioned above (I except “normal social interchange’
which has to be convemtrd to “standardized language” equivalents) a semanric
Ieaaslatian is indicated. Semantic tranvtaliun ix subtler, mare cumprehensise, macn
pgnrlrating shun communicative translation, and does not require cultural adopra’
sian, Haste (1977b) in a paper, coulusingly distinguishes ‘avert’ (i.e. semantic) train
‘carrel’ (i.e. cammunicalive) translalion—shudes of ‘ca-text’ and ‘contest’ (Catlond,
1965)—bus usefully paints aul that a ‘cuvert’ translation ‘enjoys ur mnjoyed sic) the
status of an asiginal source test in the tusges cultuer’, i.e. ann of its main characteralien
in that no one should suspect that is is a translation. Unfurtanutely nbc dons rot
distingaish stylistically between the twa types of translatian, and in her ‘“seurual”
prnflte’, she amiss such important dimensions as degree of generality and of

The distinction between semantic and communicative translation, which a brhavioue’

ist might well deny, shows huw closely translation theory rrlatrs eat only to the
philosophy of language, but ever to philasaphy in an alder sense of the teem, when it
meant perhaps ‘interpretation of thr meaning of lifr’. Thus an afhrmarive attilude to
 Cnmmunicatioe and semantic translation (I) 53

translation would perhaps stem from a betief in rationalism, in the communicabiltty

and renewal of common experience, in ‘innate’ hsman nature and even innaturallaw.

Normally, one assumes that a semantic translation is briefer and ‘more literal’ than a communicative translation. This is usually, but not always, so. If the onginal is rich in
metaphor has simultaneously abstract as well as physical meanings and is concerned
with say religion, ritual magic, witchcraft or other domains of discourse which hare
covert categories, a prose translation with explanatory power (the interpretation most
be within the translation, not follow it) is lihelyto be longer than the original. Ii has to
reproduce the full meaning of the original, not simply one of its functions.
Semantic translation is sometimes both linguistic and encyclopaedic, whilst communicative
translation is strictly functional. ‘Adam’s rib’, as Crick (1976) has pointed oat,
has always boon an inadequate translation.
It, as I believe, we are to use, in principle, semantic translation for works of
philosophy, relifion, anthropology, even politics, in tents where the manner and the
matter are fused, which are therefore well written, then the translation must be more
explicit and usually fuller than for works of literature, particularly poetry. In poetry
symbol is retained or transferred; in anthropology, it is retained and explained within
the text. As Evans-Pritchard has said ‘The translation is the interpretation’, and
therefore, the full meaoing must be in the tent, not in a string of notes.
A sent ence such as ‘Mary was a virgin mother’ must be explicated in accordance with
precisely what the translator believes the writer to have intended, normally retaining
both the literal and the symbolical/figurative interpretation.
Crick has stated that in anthropology, Evans-Pritchard led the general shift from
function to meaning: in meaning, the significance of symbols and rites in the culture,
as well as their effect on spectators and participants, are uncovered. In a period where
bare communication (functionalism) is overvalued, I think there has to be a
corresponding shift tu semantic translation of all texts that merit ii (they are not that
many).

All translation remains a craft requiring a trained skill, continlly renewed linguistic
and non-linguistic knowledge and a deal of gair and imagination, as well as
iniellifence and above all common sense. Semantic translation, basically the work of
one translator, is an art. Communicative translation, sometimes the product of a
translator’s team, is a craft. (Those who can, translate. Those who cannot, teach
translation theory, learning hopefully from their mistakes.)
The above is an attempt to narrow the range and definition of valid translation, and to
suggest that Savory’s clever and notorious definitions, which form the superscript of
this paper, since they rest on incorrect assumptions, can be reconciled. However, oat
for a moment ow I trying to minimi.ee the difficulties of many aspects (too long
overlooked) as well as instances of the translator’s task, whether it be ‘communicative’,
‘semantic’ or a combination of both. Moreover, I believe that there are also
54 Atpsoarhes to trarslatior

many texts that present few or no dif icultien to a translator, and that an effectn’e, tf approximate, translation of any test into any language to atways posstbte.
Note: The best twentieth-century comment I know on thts type of remark is to
Thomas Mann’s Introduction to Des- Zaubes’bes’g (Prtnceton Unn’erstty, 1939): ‘An
outstanding Swedish critic declared openly and drctstvely that no one would corn door to trunslute this book into u foreign language, as it was absolutely unsuttabte for
translation. This was a false prophecy. The Magic Mountain has been transtated into
atmost all European languages, and, as far as I can lodge, none of my books has
aroused such interest in the wortd.’ Cf. curious remarks about Racine’s untrunstatability
into English. (He has recently been successfully translated.) A successful translation
in probably more dependent on the translator’s empathy with the writer’s thought
than on affinity of language and culture.

Appendix
The busic diffroencr between comtxonicotisr und srmuntic tnunstution could hr
ittsstrated an follows:

Esamples where communicatise translation incorrect:

(a) Defense de mas-chet- nut-Ic gazos
C. Keep Off the gruss
S. Walking on the turf is forbidden
OR
It is forbidden to walk on the turf.

(b) Ft-itch angests-iches!

C. Wet paint!
S. Recentty painted!

‘Die Oeschschte Hans Castorps, die win eroihten wollen—nicht am seinetwillen

(dm0 den Lesenwird einen eintachen, wenn ouch anspeechenden 00gm Menschrn
in ibm kennenlennen) sondern urn den Omschichte willen, din uns in hohnm Orude
erzhhlenswert scheint (wobei. eu Hans Castoeps Ounsten denn doch eeinncet
werden sotttr, dal en seine Geschichte ist and daB nicht jedem jrdr Oeschichtr
pansiert): diese Geschichte itt sehr lange her, tie itt soeusugon schon guns mit
historischem Edrlrost iibereogcn und unbrdingt in den Zcitfonrn den tirfstmn
Veegangenheit vorzutragen.’ (Den- Zaubes-betg, Thomas Mann.)

‘Hans Castomp’s story, which wo ycoposm to tctl—noi on hit own account (for in
him the reader wilt make the acquoinsaoce of a simple though atteactis’e young
man) but ton the sake ot the stony, which seems to us to be highty worth telling it
 Curnmiitticatioe and semantic translatintt (I) 55

shouLd hosset’er be eemembered to Hans Castoep’s ceedtt shot sits hss story, and that not eteey story happens to es’erybody): thts story took place a ceey long tsme
ago, it is aleeady so to speak cot’eeed n’ith the pattna of history, and i most to any et’entbr peesee ted in atense cor esponding to the temotest past.’ (My tnanstatson.(
Comrrruoii’atics:

We ptopose to tell Hatss Castorp’s stoey not lorhis case, rut for the storys. The
reader will discover that in fact he is rather a simple but attractive young man. But
the stony seems to us to be melt worth telling, even though ii took place a long isme
ago, and is already covered in the dust of history. It is essential to show that ii took
place in the ecmoie past. Faethee ne mont boar in mind in Hans Castoep’s favour that ibis is his own story, and a story like this one does not happen to everyone.’ (My
NB.

Thorn ate cases whono for (l(, the srmantic translation is requteed (to show the
‘thoaght-procossos’ of the utteranor(, and where for (2(, the communicotivr
ties may be preferable to make the utterance on first reading mote comprehensible
and attractive.

‘Satnedi III juillet s’est tenminee one session disc enssaordinaiee qui crass plotbt là
cnnfinaation dune session qai, cIte, fat loin d’ftre ordinaire.

‘Aloes qae los deputes s’offraient en tam Ic lose do dObatire pendant vsngt sfances
do projel sun los plus-values, len senateuns, eas, se monfondaient, In goavrsnement
n’ayant pus nuffisamment utilise Ir possibilito do deposes des testes en premiere
lecture devans cerre Assembler. Ainsi Ic Sénat enregistroit-il, ow torme do Ia session
ordinaire, an deficit de 30% par rapport flu duree peodaoi laquelle il avail sieed au
prinremps de 1975.’

‘On Saturday 10 July a so-called enteaordinary sesssoo which was rather the
continuation of a session which itself was fan from being ordinary came to an end.

‘Whilst in June the deputies offered themselves she lusury of debating the capital
gains bill for 2f sessions, the senators for their part were becoming sadly bored, the
goveenmons not having sufficieusly uiilioed the possibility of soseoducing drafts foe
first reading for that assembly. Thus at the end of the ordinary session, the Senate
recorded a dehcis of 30% compared with the length of time it had sat is spring
1975.’
56 Apprsnehes ts

Commutticatice:

Saturday 10 July sass the close of an “extraoedinary” sesstos; tt tta5 ttt fact ho
custinuatian of asessioe which was itself far feom ordinany.

‘Whilst is June the deputies could alfoed the luuuey of debating the capstal fates bill
fee 20 sessions, the sosatoes ktoked theit heels in despate, as the goveenment had sot
made enough use of the oppoetuuity of passing bills on to them toe a liesl eeadieg
So at the end of the oedinaey session, the Senate had sat foe only 0’7 of the
coreesposding peeiod in spring 1975.’

Cogrtttice uastlation:
‘On Saturday 10 July “they” closed a session which “they” called esteaoedisaey; ho
session in fact continued a session which mas itself fae from being ondinany.
‘Whilst the nationally elected membres of parliament (deputtes) in June ofleeod
themselves the lusuny of debating foe 20 sessions the bill which related to ho peolite
which penple made on capital, the members elected by couscilloes to eepeeseet
departments (senatues) (second house) did nothing themselves and avers bored
and gluomy whilst they waited, as the government had nut sufficiently used Iho
psssihilily of passing hills unto their own house fur a first reading. Thus the Senate
recorded at the end of the ordinary session that they had sat 30% less than the tame
thry had sal in the spring of 1975.’
4. Thought, speech and translation

The first section of this chapter is a brief attempt to underpin theoretically my

tentatis’e distinctior between eommunicatis’e and semastic trasslatton. I hsce neither
the pretension nor the qualification to make a contribution to the natnre of thoaght
(escept in as far act have attempted to analyse my own thoaght processes), and I have
deliberately as’otded any eefeeence toils origin and des’elopment. It mill hemeversoon
become obvious that I am closer in my on’s thinking to Vygotsky and to Chomsky
than to Piagrt or to Labov, let alone to Wharf or any behaviourist view. When
Vygotsky writes, ‘Inner speech is not the interior aspect of external speech—il is a
tanction in itself. liii tealarge ostent thinking in parr meanings’ he prosides me with
a castor of reference for my definition of ‘semantic translation’ in contrast to
‘commanicative translation’. (All references in Adams, 1972.)

I believe that the primary activity, application and purpose of language in the mature
adult is thinking, not speech or writing or communication or (selt-)rspresvion.’ II is
nor possible to prove or disprove this assertion, but merely to prodace some evidence.
First, one earnot think for tong wirhoat having words in one’s mind. The effort not to
‘think’, that is, to keep one’s mind blank or to concentrate ona mental pictorial image
(or on a sensation of smell, taste, sound or roach) rather thou pursuing one’s normal
internal monologue is like holding one’s breath; one cao’t keep if ap for long.
Language therefore informs bat does not comprise thinking. One can, however, use
‘sords without sound, without thinking, if one (a) repeats short sentences, phrases or
words, (b) counts numbers, (c) tells oneself nonsense stories—the remedy for
insomnia. Secondly, eves the most loquacious person spends most of her time
thinking; I doubt whether most people spend more than five hours a day speaking
(The most loquacious, the most lonely, usually spend most time alone, thinking.)
Moreover, whilst thought and writing are concurrent activities (it is not possible to
write withoat continuous inner speech), the relation between thought and speech is
intermittent—thought sparks off speech, and speech is feequently an automatism, a
reflex action, lhe tesponse to a stimalus and only ‘weukly’ Iho psoduct of thought.
Therefore, thought is closer to writing than to speaking, aod a thisseoxe, wxivog,
arising from and controlled by thought, has priniacy over speaking Further, when
58 Apprnachrs te

one listens to a person, one normally ‘thinks’ only in lhe intnnstices of his conversation—othenisise
one ‘compeehends’ woedlessly. When one lsstens to natural soands or
music the ptopontion of internal monologue (thought) ts mach highee—oi’ee 80% of
the total time, perhaps. Sleep on the othee hand appeaes to be concur ently and continaoasly occapied by mental pictoeial images and intenior monologac. When one
is translating oral y (simaltaneoas interpretation), one only starts thinking, in the sense of ienct speech, when one is lost foe a word on meets some difbcalty when one
writes a translation one is thinking all the time.

If one accepts the proposition that thinking precedes speech and wetting and therefore
that the main parpose of language is riot to commanicate (since thoaght is by
definition private and non-commanicatise afthough it is partially, bat nesrr wholly,
commanicable) one has to resiew the now green ally accepted argaments in fasour of
the ‘primacy of speech’ (Pit Corder, 1973) or ‘the priority of the spoken langaage’
(Lyons, 1968, 1972) and reject the proposition that writing is merely a poor sabstitate
for an imitation of speech.

No one wnnld qaesriau that speech is older and more widespread than writing, non
that a child speaks before it writes. Having knowledge of a lattgaage, howesrr,* often
precedes speaking, which reqaires additional access any capacities. Lenneberg’s
(1967) report nf she child who could babbfe and read but not speak is well known. The
argument that all systems of writing ate drmonstnably based upon antis of spoken
language is mnreasrr questionable. Sounds, syllables and words are as vivid in the
mind as they are when they are spoken aloud and I believe that writing systems (like
sprrch systenss) are originated is thought, modrratrd, socialiard, made mere
‘communicalise’, etc., in speech, and then again mediated through thought. How-
over, the mast imporlant reason for challenging the primacy of speech oven writing is
that writing is much mare closely related physically and mentally to thought than is
sprech. Writing is permanent, it is usrd not necrssarily because the addressee is
inaccessible In sprech, but because our wants to make a strong and durable
impression an him. All thr world’s most important thoughts andsiatements, including
Lincoln’s, Churchill’s, Dr Gaulle’s and daublless Pericles’ spooches, were prnbabl
writlrn brlore shey were spoken. Even the material transmisted by TV and radio is
wrilten to be spoken. Speech, however, is nftes a rrspnnsr In a stimulus and ihough it
is often preceded by thought, it is frequenlly thoughtless while it lasts. I do not,
however, accept she “classical” (Lyons, 1968) principle of the priority of the written
language, which was basrd an thr superiorily 0g Sansknil, Ancient Grerk, Latin,
Byzanline Greek, GId Church Slavonic (comparr she superiority of Classical Arabic
and Mandarin ‘civil sorvanl languago’—Chinnsn over lbo vrrnacufurs and dialects),
etc., ovrr the spnkrn language—all lhese are instances 0g Gramscian ‘hegemony’, the
inlellectual esploilalion of the uneducated by the so-called educated, in other words
an elitist racket, not as materially profitable as commrrcial exploitation, but exceedingly
comforlable and fraudulent.
 Thought, speech and translation 59

I now tarn to further consideration of my distinction betmeen the ‘semantic’ and

‘communicalivo’ methods of teanstotion. Wheee sseitinf is closest to thought, wheee
the readee is ‘listeninf in’ eaihee than beinf conscioasfy addeosted, the method of
is normally ‘semantic’. tn my pees’ions aeticfe, I menlo that of aft foems of
titeeataee, the deama, since ii is addeessed to a spectator, mifht hose to make most
‘concessions’ to communicative translation. Howesee, I escepted Chekhov and
Shakespeaer, as boinf the froatrst drama. Ness I suffest that Shakespeare’s most
impcirtant ihoufhts are expressed either in his ‘monologues’ (in both senses of the
word) or in long speeches where he appears to be addressing posterity rather than
anyone on the stage or the spectator.

I take it as ansomutic that in thought oe in monologue, the expressive function of

language is predominant, the informative is incidental, the social and the phutic
inoperative. Moreover in a Shakespearean monologue the expressive and aesthetic
functions are fused. A glance even at the old Schlegel translation of Hamlet (1. 2) will
show that the diatofur is treated fairly ‘communicatively’:
Q: I pray thee, stay with us; go not to Wietenbeeg.
Ich biite, bleib bei otto geh nichi ouch Wiirenbet’g.
H: I shall in alt my best obey your madam.
Ich wilt Each get-n gehot-chen gnddige Frau.
K: Why, ‘liv a loving and a lair reply.
Wohl, dat itt eine hebe, ochdne Anrn’ot-t.

whilst an the subsequent monologue the translator wrestles with concentrated thought
and the semantic loss is considerable and inevitable:
H: 0, that this too too solid flesh would melt,
Oh, ochmdlze doch dies allzu fesie Fleisch,
Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew!
Zet’ging! and loot in einen Tao oich auf!
Or that the Everlasting had 001 fist
Odes- hdsre nichi des Ew’gr loin Gebzi
Hts canon gainst self-slaughter! 0 God, God,
Ges’ichirs gegen Selbssmosd! 0 Goii! Goti!
How weary, stale, flal and unprofiluble
Wae chef, schal and flach und unrs-ops-iejtlich
Seem to me alt thr oses of this world!
Scheani mit’ dun ganze Ts-eiben dieser Welt!
Fir oo’t! 0, fir! ‘us an unwerded garden
Pfus, Pfua das-dbes’! ‘u os s-in cusses- Gas-ten
That grows to seed: thinfs rank and gross in nature
Des’ auf in Samen ochie/ls; ces’icosfneo Unks-aus
Possess at merely. That ii should come 10 this!
Es-falls ihn gdnzlich. Dazu mOOu ci kommen?

Schleg t’sfines’rsuonixaconuiou0 5anderanslation,agenreulirution,mis ingthephystcatsenseof‘ihaw’,‘pos es ’,‘unwe de ’,‘Pint’,‘rankandgros ’.Nes rthet s ,thesyntacti scafoldingofthemon logueis plendi lyreproduced,permeatedinthe
60 Approaches to translation

German as in the English by the timeless rhythms of speech on thought, ocsthocst

conces ionsto‘com unicaliven s ’.Centainlyitwal beaptlyifev r,to henameofthe‘mes age’oe‘com unication’,this pe ch astoberemodel dor etranslated,omit ngHype ion(alreadye ducedtoApol bySchteg l),thesatyr,Ntobe,
Heecules, etc.—conscioasly directed to the mind of the tying spectator rather than to the tal est possible explication of Shakespeare’s thought.
Dichten=condensae ,asEzraPound(1934),asvaytvard,sag estvrandfrequentlyinac unatetranslator,nightlystaed,althoughap arentlyunawarethathewaspun ing,andthatdichtenhasnothing,ev nrtymot gicaty,todonatlhdicht.As
port, the translator is constrained by metre and genre. If he ss tronstating prose, he
has a little more space to being oat connotation as welt as denotation, symbol as wett
as sign; harsh alternatives are fewen. Reading a page of Paul Valery (1946) it seems to me that a teanslator cannot retain the pregnant brevity of Ia nsatoe manse . . . tache
dune crocus’. . . ae render perceptible. A componentiat analysts 0g key-cords mitt
sham that they ‘work’ physically as well as figuratively, and where possible both levels
have to be retained.5 Semantic translation, like thought, relates to the word on the
wand-group; communicative translation, like speech, relates to the sentence. Semautic
translation 0g difficult texts, however, is inevitably selective and therefore
interpeerative and evaluative, since the translator expresses his values by tejecting on
excluding the components of meaningwhich he regards asless pertinent orperipheral.
I conclude this postscript with a few stoeds on ‘commanicanive’ translation, the mote
common method, since ‘semantic’ teanslation is used only where text stun close to
thought-processes and every stage of the thoaght-process is significant. I am not
attempting to decatur communication or communicative translation, merely to
contest their present dominance. The primary purpose cal speech is to communicate,
and communicative translation is related to speech as semantic translation is to
thoaght. Just as one learns a foreign language mainly to communicate (unless one is
learning only to read and translate it), not to think in it, so one is eight is assuming
that most translation is communicative translation which is close to ‘social speech’ in
the sense I base described. Usually, one translates a tent to meet the readee’s
derrardr—to iufoem him, to persuade him, to give him advice. Allthis is communicative
translation, as is any petaloemative or direction or instruction, any use of
‘standardized’ language such as ‘no trnmps’, ‘lovely weather, isn’t it?’, ‘critical path
analysis’, ‘micro-inciuerarion’, etc. Again communicative translation is requteed
when the original has to be rearranged or improved in any way as Wilss (1930)
unconsciously does in his recent useful manual: ‘This time tomorrow I shall have
beer or my way to Berlin foe a long time’, which he translates as ‘Moegen am
 Thought, speech and translation 61

diese Zeil bin ich schon lhngst auf dem Weg nach Berlin’, which is mach better (i.e.
‘This lime tomorrow I’ll be well on my way to Berlin’). Farlher, if lhr original is
reasonably well written and is either esleacnlineal or oxerlaps with the target language
culture, there is no eeusun why it should not be translated cammonicutin’ely and
semantically at the same time—the ‘ideal’ solution, not because it will be a unique
ideal teanslatton (this idea, still fostered by Koller, the Leipeig School and others, but
oat by Wilts, ts peopasterout(,5 bat because it is designed to satisfy both the author oh
the text and the eeadce of the translation in equal measure.

ngainst and arrnan,ntng hypotheses, etc ma ing ypot rsrt, obsrening, xrntying, tollrctingdatn, testing
5. Communicative and semantic translation
(II)

Theconcepts of communicative and semantic translation repnesent my main contnbution

to general translation theory, and I return to them as! have to modify and clarify
both concepts.
The two cnnceprs mere formulated in opposition to the monistic theory that
translation is basically a means of communication or a manner of addressing one or
mare persons in the speaker’s presence; that translation, like language, is purely a
social phenomenon.
In siew 0f the fact that translation rests on at feast three dichotomies the foreign and
nation cultures, the tmn languages, the mriter and the translator respectively, with the
trannlalioneeadershiplonmingoverthemhote process—itsremsunlikelythutitcun be
incnrporated in one theory. Farther, all the writers ot the past have defined two or three
methods 0f translation, sometimes only recommending one and disparaging the
remainder (e.g. Nida and Nabokov), at other times, us in Schleiermachcr’s classical
definition, teasing the translator free to lean either on the writer’s or the readee’s
shontdee. Lastly, behindthisteunslation argument there isaphilosophicalconflict. This
is said to be the age of reproduction, of the media, of mass-communication and I am
snggeslingthalshesocialfactorisonly a paetofthetrath, continuouslyoveremphasized
bytechnologyandthepresentpoliticaludvancetodemocracy. Thusthe’enpeesnive’ test
represents an individnal, not wholly socialized nor conditioned, voice.
Admittedly, all translation must be in some degree both communicative and semantic,
social and individual. It in a matter of difference of emphasin. In commojticatit’e
translation, however, the only part of the meaning 0f the original which is rendered is
tIl,pi’r (which may even be the ‘opposite’ of the original, as in objeto tt’out’dn, ‘lost
property’) n’hich corresponds to the TL reader’s understanding of the identical
message. If the translator is dealing in standardized terms for both languages, there
may be no problems. Otherwise, the translator has to bear in mind a composite
sdentskit reader, following appropriate TL usage, modifying, correcting and improving
the latest versions of the fair copy of his translation often without any reference to
lheorsgsnal.Clearly,lhereisadangerhereofcaptueingtoosmulfupuetoftheorigsnal
message, an for instance in the following esumple taken from Seleskovitch (1979): ‘II
n’y a pan de mat a prendre do temps en tempn an icier do imp quand on sort’
rrndered as ‘It’s all right to get a bit drank at a party.’ One of the many problems of
communicative translation is to decide to what extent one should simplify nod
therefore emphasize the basic message. A second is to strike a mean, to decide on the
highest common factor of intelligenre, knowledge and sensitivity possessed by the
 Conictticn&ttd setttartin tsattslatins (II) 63

total neadership—inetitably one thinks of communicatee translation as

sication. Atranslation
third a precisely sot tthe
a tnsaltfact
the intelthat
igence ofifsthe resuccess
adership, as the medicana oftbeon do.measured
Bat the most importantonly
problembyts thetnvesttgattng
intait ce satare of commanithecalice
reaction of the readers to sshom 5 is addreued.

In recosadeeieg semantic translattos, Ibefiit by dtstiitfuishittg tt from Ittmral

In pnetioas articles I hate adapted Nabokot in defining semanttc translatton as an

attempt to render. as closely as the semantic and syntacttc structures of the target
language allen. the osoct contestaat meaning at the original (‘only thts ts true
translation’, Nahokoc arote(: I contrasted this method of translation tstth commant—
translation, tuhich is also true translation, and much more in demand.

I now propose two further definitions:

Interlinear teanslatton (Nabokoc’s lesical on cosstractiosal translatios(: the
primary senses of all words tn she ortginal are translated as though out of contest, and
the mnrd-erden of the original is nctaiscd. The mats purpose ss either to understand
she mechanics of the source lasguage otto constitute a pm-translation procedure for a
complicated SL test.

(2( Literal translation: the primary senses of the lesical words of the onigtnal are
trasslated as rhoagh oat of contest. bat the syntactic structures of the target language
are respeered.
The basic diffenence betwens uemastic and literal translation ts that the former
respects cortest, the latter does not Semantic translation sometimes haste interpret.
nursesplair a metaphor, if isis meanisgless in the target language (retertheless. only
as a last resource, only if she translator ts cons’iscnd that the melet’ant background
knowledge is isaccessible to his reader). In semartic rrarslatios. the translator’s girst
loyalty is so his aarhor; is lireral translation, his loyalty is. on the whole, to the norms
0f she source language.

Iris ironical that Nabokos’ (l964( himself often translated literally, not semantically:
‘She, to lank back sot daring, accelerates her hussy step’ (Eugene Onegin. 5, p. 1311,
1.1—2), mary times relying or the reader referring to the copious noses as well as
hating access so the original. Further, in stating ‘To my ideal of literalism I sacrificed
es’erything (elegance, euphony, clarity, good taste, modern usage, and rues grammar(
that the dainty mimic prices higher than the truth’, he is ciolating his own
principles (‘as closely as the syntactical capacities of arother language allow’( fty
sacrificing ‘rues grammar’.

Nabokos’s contribution to translation theory, his attack en the ‘panaphrasts’. his scorn
of the communication racket, etc., was tremendous, but his own practice was not as
close In his principles as, say, Andreas Mayor’s tension of Lm Tempt t’ett’oai’m.
64 Apptoaches to

If rho ‘semantic’ translator is asked whether his (agreed) first daty to his author is
nor to cammanicate the meaning of the text to the reader, hts answer ts perhaps Yes
and No. Certainly, tt the text is rot modern, the translation has to be pat torn
modern language, which in itsotf moses it rearer to the reader. Farther, if thg
languago contains symbolism and enprrssisr elements sshtch are Ithety to be cornptetoly
inaccessible to the reader, then it is the transtator’s dory at toast to make

their comprehension possible Mureosro, in translot ng a philosophical test, hr may hç tempted to write what Aloe Bass (see Drr ida, 1978) has called a ‘compound
English’, ‘a compromise of English as we know it and as he mould like it to be in
order to capture as much of the original test as possible’. Bass relects this in fasour
of a natural syntas combined with a detailed explication of theme—words by way of
commentaries in brackets, which forces him to motto three times as much as the
original toe one short passage. Bass belieses that the translator’s position resembles
that of the psychoanalyst who attempts to tnanslutr the manifest language of dreams
into a latent language, which is no mote helpful than the other cliches about
translation. In general, philosophical tests hase a stronger communicatise element
that artistic tests, dealing with generalities rather than particalanities, with esplana.
ions and definitions rather than inoages and symbols, and the translator would
orientate his parpose accordingly.

On the other hand, the original anther does not ‘cemmanicute’ with rho reader any
mote than she translator, in an artistic test. The tnunsf urns only goes as fat as
making it possible for thr modern reader to understand, to listen, to easesdeop like
Pelonius behind the areas. Why? Becaust the translator has to be jealous of the
form of the original, the form which, adapting Gembrich’s (1972) words, ‘modifies,
refines and artientates thonght’; which, if it were distorted (it inesitably is partially
distorted), distorts the thought. That is why the translator of a great work of
literature, en any important utterance, is en a tightrope, has to work so carefully.
His fiost loyalty is to his author, his second is to the target language, his lust to the

Farther, in poetry to particular and imaginatise writing in genreat, all common and
general concrete words hase connotations, and therefore hase some of the force of a
metaphor without its image or sehicle. Sooner or later, they themselses aroused as
images or sehicles, and become metaphors (esery yar, common or sogur words in
any semantic held become metaphuns). When these words are tnanslated, they lose
their connutanions no metaphorical sense, unless shone is a cultural oserlap between
soarer and target language Thus, a tree which may symbolize or faintly suggest
drselopment or life or strength in one language may, being rarer rn another, hose
few connotations and the translator may base to attempt to replace the object with
another with corresponding connotations in the TL (the commoner the word, the
more abandant its connolalions). Since the symbol and connotations are at least a
part of the meaning of the test, the ‘semantrc’ tnanslaten is entitled to ascount fur it,
net necessarily to satisfy this or that reader.
 Cno,nsanicatier and ass’ astir teas aIrs (II) 65

In precious papers I base anderestimated the tmpostance of aesthetsc calur, or of

poetictruthin semantic ttanstation (whilst Nabokoc tgnored 5). I take Keats’s dtctam

‘Beaaty is trcth, trash beauty—thss Ye knorc on earth and all ye seed to knew.’ (Ode as a Grecian Urn.)

I take it that poetic stash has no intrinsic ot sndependent meantog, bat that ass
castelatice with the canaan types of meaning in a test, and that tIthe translator
desthetroystranslator
poetic truth, hr impaiistrodaced
rs tad distorts meartsng.crade
Thus, drlscaalliterations
cy or gealtrnrs conceyedoris morad-contrised
order and sound, as word-order.
well as in cognst ce senseAesthettc
, would be mmcd, if
is dependent on the fotlemtsg factors:
(a) otr’actar’e—for rho transtatias, the plan of the trst as a whole and the shape and
balance of rho isdicidaal serterect;
(b) metaphor—the cisual images which may also rcokr sound, teach )rncludrug
tempreatare and climate), smelt and taste;
(c) uoand—incladisg alliteration, asseraser, rhythm, onomatopoeia, and, in poetry,
metre and rhyme.

A translator cannot ignore any of the three factors is prone or poetry, althoagh he
may, for each test or is principle, order these gactors, gscisg priority to cognitice

Nabokoc is theory ignored poetic troth, although in fact it appeased in some of his
earlier translations. Now, I am suggesting thus the aesthetic factor, if it esists in the
original, must somuis in tho translation. Take lbs opening of Valery’s Introduction
Ia méthodo de Ldosurd do Vinci: ‘II rests d’un homme cc que dassest S songes son
nom el Irs oeucres qui font do cc sam as signe d’udmieution, do haine ou
d’isdigferesce. Nuns pessons quit a pessé, et sons poucoss erteoucee enter set
oeusrescrtle pensfe qui Iui ciert do sons: sous pousons refaire cotte pester S l’image
do Ia shIre.’

The passage is murveflously articulated, mathematically assungod usupeogtession;

basically the structure must be reproduced, whilst tho ellipses can be modified so that
they are not us gauss us literal translation would make them. Malcolm Cowley and
J. R. Lawless translation is as follows: ‘What a man traces after him are the dreams
that his name inspires urd the works that make his same a symbol 0g admiration, hate
or indifference. We think of how bethought and we are able to find within his works a
kind of thinking desiced from ourselses that we utteibute to him; me can refashion this
thought in rho image of our own.’

The following is an ultempt so go as close to the cagnitice meaning as I cur without

prejudicing aesthetic caIne: ‘Tb err re mains 0g a man the thoughts which his name and
the monks making his same a murk of admiration, hatred or indifference ecoke. We
think that he has Ihoughl and we can find within his work a thinking which reaches
him from as; we can recreate Ibis Ihinking is lbs image of oar own.’
66 Approashes to translation

Aesthetic truth, like music, is perhaps a more goner at quality than meamug. and thu
hastheherssecond
beautiful y preseplace
rved in Cowland
ey and Lawl‘mark’
rn’s enstonort do‘sign’
not think it moulhadd havreplaced
e bern impaired if in‘symbol’.
the girst sentence ‘Inspires’
‘remains of’ had replisacedtnleasthe
es afterright
tn
ptacr at a considerable semantic toss! Stark as it in, I see no altrrnatisr to translating

‘Nounperson qu’ilaprune’at nythingbut‘irethinktha ehasthought’;anhp(‘c quitapensf’)canhrosclude,anthe saymanrosined35ycornlaterThesnir o,think,sen s imptyoidentifyLeonardo’sthink gwith(odcotedlmankid’s.Inmanyothercasr,theransltorscould,inmyopino,basecomeclosertohe

original without reducing its aesthetic salon ‘do nimplrs soosonsrsro ressuscstool los
mobiles or Irs reactions elementaires’, translated as ‘his motives and elementary
reactions can be supplied quite simply from our own memories’, where ‘restored to
life by’, or ‘resivod by’, could easily replace ‘supplied from’. Later, the translators
take lieu as lion without esplanaiiou With all this, thoy hose wrestled wiih iho iesi,
and produced a fine sersion, blemished by unnecrsnary concessions to their own idea
of style.

A srmantic translation is not a rigid procedure: it is admittedly mote obfoctise than

commanicative translation, since the SL words as well as the sentences (elsewhere 1
describe these as the two articulations of meaning) are operative asa form of control.
Howrn’er, the translator asay be constantly esercised beturen the proportion of
denotation aad connotation in the original test, boating in mind ihat so a literary test,
the c0060tatise and allegorical aspect is the most important.
Thus translation theory cannot be dogmatic, must allow for and make allowances for a
sensitis’e and wayward translation, such as A. Macdonald’s at Mafraus’s La Condirion
hamainr: here ten hemmer become ‘ordinary life’, déeoucr’ir’ ‘first notice’, r’egardcr’
aeee indifference ‘jast glance at’, whilst topic and comment are oft en reversed, and
fairaientfaibfemeno is ‘a faint gleam’, le eiollumincuxr’y r’efletaii ‘it wasaregection of
the glow in the sky’. All thin can be justified as cornotieg how Chen eiewed the scene.
Other translations of lacts, auto-mirr’ailleuser as ‘machine-guns’, dccanrlui, porpends’
ealair’e ‘in front of him, rose up’, are harder to fustily. Nevertheless, this translation
gets away with in, undo same of Stuael Gilbeet’s, because 0f their empathy: further,
since ennnotatinns (for Chen) appear to be the main objective, it is difficult to assess
the translation using this ‘potential’ criterion.

Nevrrthrless, nothing is now wore obvious than that the eriteoion of a translation,
whethrrcommanicatiseorsemartic, musthe itsmeasure of accuracy, itsabilitytoreprodam
the greatest possible degree of the meaning of the original: the heart of the meaning
being the mertage in communicatise translation—the significance, the enduring
value and importance in semantic translation. Admittedly, in cemmanicative translation
aeertainembroidrning, astylistiesynonywy, a discoret modulation is eundoned by
sewn translators, bowmen annecessary it is, presided the facts are ntraight and the
 Communication and semantic translation II) 67

reader is suitably impressed. In semantic translation, tnaccuracy is always wrong.

Hans Keller (1977) in showing up the inadequacies of the two English translations of Kafha’s The Txal pats the point paradosical y: ‘Indeftnt e styltst csenst tVlty maybe
the nest best thing to a definable recognition of the literary truth, but its nes’er mare
than a substitute.’ Keller happened to choose as his examples the opening and end of
The Trial where mainly one-to-one translations are approprtate and therefore
mandatory, and the primary meanings (in a legal content) of words such as
i’erleumden, Eniocheidung, are required. Although Keller fasts to point out that in the
great majority of translation problems ‘definable rrcognttton of literary truth’
(presumably he means a single correct one-to-one translation) does not esist and the
translator requires here as elsewhere a not so ‘undefinable stytistic sensttivity’, he ts
right in his main point, which is that there is no excuse for inaccuracy where accuracy,
panticularly of ‘standardierd’ language, is possible. Herr translation must be in line
with thr contemporary cultural climate, which is rightly for openness, frank nest and
truthfulness, irrespective even of content.

Clearly much remains to be examined. The delicate relationship between aesthetic

solar and srmantic truth requires a full-scale discussion when translation and the
rsprrssine function of language are considered. In a significant text, semantic truth is
cardinal, whilst at the three aesthetic factors, sound (e.g. alliteration or rhyme) is
likrly Sn rrcrde in importance—thyme is prrhaps the most likely factor to
‘give—rhyming is difficult and artificial enough in one language, reproducing rhymr
is sometimes doubly so. Structure will always be important and has its awn
(dangrrous) sense connotations, e.g. balance, orderliness, harmony, logic, opposition
(or their rexerse) which may not always be in line with the purpose of the passage or
its main themes.

Whilst recent publications (e.g. Wilss, 1978) bane continned to assume, implicitly or
not, arta lookfaea general single translation theory, there hone been twoexcepsians:
Differ and Koenelius (1978) have proposed two types of translation:
(a) primary translation, which establishes communication between SL writer and TL

(b) secondary translation, which informs the TL reader of a communication between

SL writer and reader (and includes the translation of literary and scientific tests).
The names and definitions are neat, but to regard tsteraey as ‘secondary’ teanslation is
nat satisfactory, nnr is it, as Shove suggested, a matter of communication with the SL
any mare than with the TL reader.

Whilst ‘primary’ and ‘secnndaey’ translation correspond in general terms to my

‘cammnnicative’ and semantic’ translation, Diller and Kornelius (in an eucellent

book) do not analyse the dif erences. Secondly, as mentioned in my first paper, House (1977a) in thr book based nn her thetis distinguish as soarce outrace-linked
‘avert’ translation and soaece caltare-free ‘covert’ translation; eqaivalent funclion
(i.e. dynamic equivalence) can be achieved only in cases of covert translation. In spite
68 Approaches to translation

of hen distinction between ‘linked-to’ and ‘free-from’ the SL culture, she states that
corerS teanstatior u’ilt atso requite the application of a ‘cultural filirs’.
assume some correspondence betvvees hen osert and cosert and my semaottc and
communicative traustatious respectively. She does not monk out the distinction. ‘In the absence of completed fingoistic—cut urat conirastive studies, the ei’aluation of these
two types of translation inevitably contains a sobjecte’e henmeneottc efoment.’ Thss is mord-droppinf, hut afain, she represents a challenge to the prevailing vrew that
erfor’reythevery
inf must alotest-type
’ays be done for thand
e readertranslation
of a translation, hut heprocedurr.
must hurt everythingWhich
sensed up toI hicannot
m, thaI hr iv thaccept
erefor the unifying and generalieing factor

Thrrr is a certain purtllel betwere, on the one hund, communicative und semantic
translation, and on the other the unirersalist und thr rrlativist thrses of language and
thr various gradations bntween them.
Taken to their eutrrmes, the univrrsalist thrsis is that since men hose commas
thoughts and feelings, they should have no difficulty in communicating with each
other, whatever language they use. The relativist thesis is that men’s thoughts and
feelings arr predeterminrd by the various languages hence cultures they are born into,
and threrlure communication is not possible.
Communicative translation assumer that esact trantlation may hr possible and maybe
pertecl. It always reads like an oeiginul und it must, as Nidu stresses, sound ‘nuturul’.
If the original is a comptev technical or institutional test, it may be as difficult as an
‘espressive’ test, but the difficulty will reside either in the obscurity (usually the bad
writing) of the test on the lack of equivalent trchnical institutional terms in the target
language. With all this, the translator barn montage reconvey, and a message always
can be conveyed. Basically this is a ‘univrnsalist’ position.
On the other hand, complete meaning on rignihcance whether of wend, sentencrot
test, can hardly ever be tranrlereed. In approaching an ‘euprersivc’ test, the
translator’s position is relativist. I do not think it is ‘attra-Whorfian’, at Steiner (1978)
misleadingly suggests, since we ate en teeing the reparate individual ‘language-world’
of one person, not of a whole ethnic group. (Steiner confusrs the tsvo.) Nevrrthefess,
here the form of the testis important, and presents its own difficulty. (Somr writers
have said that where the Poem of a test is part of the message, translation is
‘impossible’.) This has the same rather banal and meaningless truth as the ‘opposite’
prnuouncement that one should translate as the original writer would il he had all the
means of the contemporary TL at his disposul—which, however, is a valid argument
for playing Mozaets* piano concrrtos with a piano rather than a fortepiano! Since the
form of the testis important, semantic translation may well not read like an original
TL test, but given the ‘bands’ oP semantic translation, this is far from being a
prescription. In any event, semantic translation wilt read like original writing—
whether in lbe sounce or target language is largely irrelevant.

nrrnt Ednur Wind’s Reith lectures us An nrddrnrehy (1968).

 Csmmanioatioe and semantic translation Ii) 69

Steiner (1978) has usefully drawn attention to a puazting passage in Chomskys

Atpecx of the Theory of Syntax (1965): ‘The possibitity eta reasonable procedure for
nantlation between arbitrary languages depends on the sufficiency of substantive
universals. In fact, although there is mach reason to believe that languages are to a
significant extent cast in the same mould, there is little reason to suppose that
reasonable procedures of translation are in enerat possible.’ The main reason offered
by Chomshy is that there in no ‘point to point correspondence between particolar
lanfuafrs’—a significant remark, suggesting that Chomsky thinks all
should be use-to-one. By a ‘reasonable procedurn’ he means ‘one that doesn’t involve
cstralsngusssic information’ apparently unaware that linguistic translation procedures
must be contextually supported and sometimes supplemented by ‘the encyclopaedia’.
In the case of missing information—the supplying of this information, say for
ambsguous pronouns: nach oeiner Beoeozang, ‘after Frances occapation’, is itself a
reasonable procedure. isis strange that Chomsky, who so stridently reperspots a
unsversalsst against a relativist position, should hr so sceptical in his attitude to
translation, but to my knowledge he has never shown any interest in the subject and should not have pontificated about it.

Cnmmuntcassve translation is always concentrated on the reader, but the

equtvalent.effrcs element is snopreant if the testis out of TL space aod time. Thus the
transtatson of a medical test by Gales or Hippocrates would attempt to clarify all the
facts of she test, as though the original test were being explained to a modern readnr—anyequtvalentefgect is only in the imagination.
Lastly, I am not suggesstng that ‘expnnssivr’ texts, in particular great literature, have
no ‘message’: on the contrary, I think their (moral) message is of their essence, Bus
this message is not simple or dtrect (like most propaganda), but diffused through
evaddreused
ery pant o6thr test, andtothanyone
is tsprecitelywhywho
semantiisc trawilting
nslation has tsoo wres(learn
tle with wordtos asread
well as claoruseslisten.
, with the author’s inner mraning and is only ultimately
6. The translation of proper names and institutional
and cultural terms

Since proper names and institutional and cultural terms shade otto each other, I
discuss this important, extensive and vietually andebated subject withtn one chaptee,
bat I propose to split it into five pants: proper names; historical instttntional teems;
international institntionat teems; national institutional ternss; and cultnral terms.

The basic distinction between prsper names and cnltural teems is that while both refer
to persons, objects or processes peculiar to a sinfle ethnic community, the former
havr singalar references, white the tatter refrr to classrs of entities. In theory, names
of singtr persons or objects are ‘outside’ langnages, belong, if at all, to the
encyclopaedia not the dictionary, have, as Mitt stated, no meaning or connotations,
arr, therrforr, both untranslatable and not to hr translated.

In fact, whitr the position is nolhinglikr so simptr, thr principle stands that unless a
single object’s nra person’s name already has an accrpted translation it should not be
translated but must be adhered to, unless thr name is used usa metaphor. If the name
becumrs commonly used, it may be modified in pronunciation and spelling; but
nowadays, when people have become as jealous of their names as of their national
and linguistic independence, this is not likely.

The established practices for translating the names of ntsvontcovt’tuvnEs are as

follows. Where sovereigns had ‘translatable’ Christian names and they were well
known, their names, together with titles (e.g. Richard Corur de Lion) were and are
still usually mutually translated in the main European countries. However, in English,
Lewis has reverted to Louis and Francis to François, and in French George is now
preferred to Georges. ‘Christian’ names referring to Biblical figures (e.g. all saints in
Biblical times and later) remain translated. Surnames have usually been preserved,
but the surnames, first names and appellative names of some Italian artists have been
‘naturalized’ in some European languages (e.g. Titien, Titian, Ic Tintoret, Raphael,
Michefange, fe Cat’at’age, Leonard, as well as Machiavef). Names of classical writers
are usually naturalized (Ari.stotr), while the French translate the first names of some
historical and literary figures (Jean Hut, Henri Heine, who died in Paris). The only
Itsing person whose name is always translated is the Pope.

In belles-letters, names are normally translated only if, as in some plays, the
characters and milieu are naturalized. Neabert (1972) has pointed out that in the best
German translation of Tom Jones the characters’ surnames are translated since they
70
 The tsanslatins of prupre tenses ned tnstitutiural and cultural testes 71

‘meat’ as sell as ‘name’, but I do not thick they mould be translated in a modern
version, since this mould suggest that they change these natsonalsty.
While suenatses is hones often have deliberate cosnotatsons through sound asd
measing, the teanslator should esplain the cosnotatioss in a glossary and tease the
intact (escept, ol coarse, is allegories like Pilgt’inst Ps’ogs’eno, Es’es’yman, etc.,
n’heee the characters are sot specifically Esglish).

Proper names is laity stories, lolk tales and childees’s literature ate often translated,
on the ground that children and taints ate the same the n’onld over. The names at
heroes ol folk tales are not translated if they represent national qualities.

A possible method of translatinf i.tnERAnv Proevn Nones that have connotations in the
SLishirsttotranslatethesvondthatunderlsesthepnopeenameintotheTL,andthen
to naturaliee it back into a nets SL proper name. Thus in translating Wuckloed
Squeers into German, ‘shack’ becomes pt’iigels becomes Pt’oogle. and possibly
Squrers (squint, queer?) could become ochinlen and the name in a Germ an vets ion
might be translated as ‘Pt’oogle Squeen’n’ or ‘Pt’oogle Sheel’. In other cases the
connotations, bath ol sued-images and general soundechoes, are similar in German
(e.g. Crummles, Wttttterby, Pecksniff lpicken, nchniiffeln), Glubb) and the names
mould, therelore, remain as they are in the Germ on version, but should be
appropetately changed in languages mhich have diflerent sound connotations. The
attempt must be to repeodnee the connotations of the original in the TL, but to find a
name consonant mith SL nomenclature, thus preserving the character’s nationality.

Thetranslatoralsohastoconsidermhetherapreviousteanslationortanscriptonmayatradybegen ralyac epted,makingit nadvisabletointroduceascmone.Further,intranslatingnamesofinstiutions,asop osedtopersonalnames(e.g ‘Dotheboys

Hall’) he nerd perhaps be lesseonstrained to reproduce the Englishness, and ceuld try
something like: Internal Schn’indeljunge (i.e. ‘Smindleboys School’).
I have taken Dickens’s names as an esample, but his monk (and, of course,
Shakespeare’s, e.g. Belch, Aguecheek( as melt as Wilde’s and Sham’s is nom too sell
knomn is mnst langnages for any retranslation of proper names. The peocedune could
be tried toe Eltaabethan, Jacobean and Restoration Comedy (Pinchmife, Tmeekmife (zn’icken) foe German, Psnchfaem for French, though the pun on ‘pinch’ is
Shertdan, Thnmas Mann, Günter Grass, 7. B. Priesttry, Anthony Pomell, J. C. Pomys
cnuld receive the same treatment in places, but only shore the murk is virtually
anknomn in the TL cultuer, and mhere the translator is convinced that the connota
lions nf the proper name ts at least as important as the nationality. (If the mork is an allegory mithout national application, proper nomen are tnanslated straight.) These
coined names could not be as effective as the originals, and mould have to be more cleverly contrived than my omn esamples. (Alpert (1979) has nightly pointed out that
Squeres also has a ‘squint’ cnmponent.(
There are Elizabethan and Jacobean comedies mhere the message is more important
than the cultnre, and it could also be said that the remoteness oh the period justifirs a
tregarded
nanslat nn of the penper names. GlSser (1979) has noted that names in the Docton”n Dilemma have rtmatned unaltered in German, althnugh G. B, S. may melt have
German doctors then and nom as no less fatuous than British ones. On the
72 Approaches to

other hand, to translate the characteen’ names tn Tom Janet tnto ‘pure’ Getman, hawevet well, seems misplaced In me. I offer my own solst on as the only
theoretical y cor ect one, if the culture and the message ate approutmately equally impertant, bet I realier that its practice requires escepttet ut t ngnsst c skrl .
The only types of proper names applied to categonet of objectu are ttademanks,
brteems),
and-names andand
peoptietomany
ry names. Thessach
e must notterms
be translatbecome
ed unles they hareponyms
e become eponyms andbefore
are used genertheicaloblect
y (e.g. relrtgergoes
ator, countleout
s medtofcal
patent—tn whtch case they most be translated, olten by a common noun
(hoover aopir’areur. etc.). Numerous drugs are marketed under dit erent propnetury romeo in various counteirn: many are listed in Martindule’s Phar’macopoera. but
consultution with the makers is usually required. Thaltdomtde was Cortergar rn the
Federal Republic of Germany.

GruGr.seurc.st. ea.snrs share, with the namer of some people, the rare charactertsttc
thut some of them (usually the smatter and less important) denote only one obtrct and
husenoconnututions. In bilingual areas, geographtcal features usually hare tree
names, each phonofogicalfy or morphologicalfy at home in its language. Further in the
past, nations have tended to nururalier names of towns and provinces they have
occupied, visited frequretty or considered impoetart: thus, the features have boon
renamed partly, to facilitate pronurciation (Prague, Warsaw, etc.) ard spelling
(Vienna), or a new word creused partly as an escuse for linguistic chuuvioism
(Rhodesia). Rhodes, a diamond millionaire, believed in ‘British rule throughout the
world’ and referred contemptuously to ‘Negrophiles’. South Atrica wilt become
Azania and many other Europear geographical names in Agrica are likely to have a
short fife now. There is now a slight tendency to restore original spellings (Romania,
Lyon, Marseiflr, Braunsvhwrig—no lunger British, reyul.—rtc.) und nespect is likely
tube shows loony newly-independent country by scrupulously observing the spelhog
of its name, however difficult to pronounce. Other geographical rames are likely a
remain galticiord, angliciord, itafianized, etc., provided that they are fairly commonly
used ard that their additional, translated name has no political (e.g. irredentior)
significance. The translator must check on usage, particularly where a different name
is used (e.g. Lake Geneva/Lac Léman, Luke Constance/Bodenoee, Bdle/Bauilea/ffaoel
hut English Baste) and good atlases which give all posnible names way not be helpful.
Italian names for German and Yugostav towns are rather ‘remote’, e.g. Magonoa.
Tr’ecir’i, Agootsa, Fiume, Spalalo, Raguoa, Colonia. National pride and independeucc
are regecred in the ‘pure’ African names for the new African states, and wentrrr
Poland’s sha dding of German town-names. In the GDR all fonmerfy German-
occupied towns, rivers, etc. (not provinces), are culled by their national names except
Prague. hut Coechs keep their own names for German towns.

Where the connotations of a geographical name are implied in a historical or literary

test (e.g. foeTrebtinko) thetronslatorwilt havetobringtfoemout irhisversion. if his
readers ore un likely to know them. Where she denotation of the name is not known or
obscure to the reader the translator often adds the appropriate generic name: ‘the
river Rehe’, ‘the town of Ratheim’.
 Thn trarslatinr of proper names and institastioeal ard cultural terms 73
Names of streets and squares are not usa ally translatrd—ucsth tIne escoptton.
conically. of Red Square, Wcocoslos Squanc (Prague), Cocrtstutton Square. Athens,
nchich nemaic untranslated if they are asrittrn as addtosses. Publtc butldtngs may be
partially translated (e.g. St. Giles Kir’che) tf the gr000c teem sn common and
As for coons or .soeocss. tn September 1939 The Times, havtng been pro-Hstler for
years, suddenly downgraded ‘Horn Hitlr ’ (and, ssmslarly, hts colleagues) to Hstler and we kness ac more at war. The presrnt practice is esther to address all and sundey
asMrorMra (ssith increasing use oIliest names, thereby omstt ng the ‘handles’) acts teanscribe M., Hen’. Ssgnere, Soda,’, etc., foe all aorstern and central European
(Aeistocratic
‘cisil zed’) languages, aland
lowing alprofessional
l other prominenls a Mr.titles
The fsrsl prareactscetranslated
utlI prevail, but the itTL house- style (nesospapers, pertodtcals, err) must ho respessed.
there ts a rocognszed eqaa’alent
(Comb, Gs’af, Horeog, Machete, Marquis, Profetaeur’, Dokbor, etc.); olbersosse they
are cithee transcetbed (Dom) or deleted (StaaSana’all, accecato, sngenserr(, wtth she
professional snfarmation added, if considered appropriate.
Names of rtns, rmvcro tNsstTvetovs, 5C000L5, biNtVrostrtcs, OO5PtTAL5, etc., ore so
principle not translated since they arc cclated to the SL culture. It they ‘shine
through’, they may occasionally be translated Banca Vaeienale d’ttalsa, National
Bank 0g Italy’; Kantonopital, Boon, ‘Basin Canton Hospital’), pacticalacly in an
informal test. Multinational companies trade under sartous names which the translator
may hase to trace. 1 general, the purpose of these names is to identify rasher
than describe the host or institution, and if the TL reader wants to refer to them, he
eeqairrs the SL name in the addrrss.
The names of NowseapEos, 0000NALs and ecotontc.sr.s are always transcribed. Famous
muons or son are usa ally erferred to by their established translated tstles (including
the authorioed titles of literary workn), if they are well known here; but attempts to
translate Coot fan tutte (even when sung in English) have been abandoned, and
Verdi’s and Wagner’s titles are often Inansccibed. When a work is not already known,
irs title is transcribed. A translator makes his own translation sea tstle only when bets
translating the whale mock or when additional comment is made on the title by
himself or in the original rest. Titles of paintings, if they have no established
translation, should be trarseribed as well as translated, so that the reader can leak for
farther references if he wishes. Titles of untranslated books mast be transcribed, with
a translation in parrntkrsis, parnivularly for non-literary books when the title
describes the conlent. Some paintings such as the ‘Mona Lisa’ base ‘different’ titles in
the original—La Giaeonda or LaJoconde. Titles of musical works hare to hr treated
cautiously—neither the ‘Emperor’ oar the ‘Elrira Madigan’ concertos esist tr other
languages, and references no opus or Khehel numbers are eecommended.

It can, I think, be accepted that all nbsolete institretineat terms, anlets they have
established translation eqnivalenrs, should be transcribed. These are token words
(eeorn.témoino, as Mature, 1953, calls them), which give the colour and flavour of
bb AP wh I d R ft gd: 66 (1969) hk p f h by
ax ‘poorotizens’. proce ge ltyetdn ax ‘atttey’geneeal’syndtc It
seems to me equally mtsgaided end confusing suddenly toconce et the Atieieo Regime into the ‘Old Regime’ (Axed, 1969). on the bot’der’eaa into the ‘file’ or the ‘list’.
Homesen. the English neadet, both tayman and expert, ts enettled to asststancc mtth ebsetete institut enal wends. A scholanly book might handle them in a glossany when
the tenms can be explained in detail Cobb btmselt inclades a hetef glessuny, matnly of
modeen tsoeds, bet leat’en many modenn words untranslated and anexplatned. relying
on bin enormous zest tacont’ey at leant the reltsh of theie meantng. A more popular
honk such as Cebban’s A Hintery of Medre’n Fiance (1965) xhowx how loan’xaords can
be casaally explained within the test, thus: ‘the gabelle, the hated salt tax ‘the aidei,
excise tax on drinks, tobacco, etc.’; ‘the don gr’aluit on free gift’; Ia grandr peat’ is
foand in the index to explain the Great Feae. Othee institationul teems can be
explained neatly in beackett. ‘leoeci’ei da tot (the king’ x neceet diplomacy)’; in
adjectival clauses (or pueticipial pheases(: ‘abbot cemmendatao’eo, abbex nba eseecisednoeeligiousfunctions’;oeinpaeenthexis.Furthee,onecanaxenotes
atthe

bottamofthepage(aeattheendotchapteearthebook(,wheretheinstitaiionaltetm
cue be explained at greater length.

Translators of historical teems hate to be caneful both to teansceibe end explain

Aneirn Regime teems such as par’lement (a notaniously misleading cognate) and
intendant; the Dit’eetoir’e is annuIty adopted, the ‘Consulate’ and ‘becond Empire’
translated arcing to their ‘teanspaneucy’; the ‘Populat Fnant’ sexually teansluted
because af its transparency as xsell units internatiunal appltcationx; the dodle drguee’x’e
is the ‘phoney mar’ since it was a binationaf es’ent.

Bismaeck’s Kultutkampf had internatinnal eepercussions, bat it is not teanslated, puttly

because a liteeal translation wauld he misleading urd a neat rqixiculent mould be hoed
In find.

Most international institutional terms base offictut ttanslutianx, made by translaton

teams, at the appropriate international organieatioe. These are uftrn through
translations (calqueo, ‘loan.teanslatiens’), e.g. Or’ganioation inter’nationale du Travail,
‘Internatienal Labour Oeganization’, which are usa ally known by their relevant
acronyms, e.g. OfT, ‘ILO’, AiD, (IDA’, OJPC, ‘ICPO’, C1DST, ‘STlDC’ (see
European Commasit(et Glotxar’y, F E, 5th edition). Othen otganieaeions hate
international acronyms, e.g. ‘CERN’, ‘Interpol’, ‘ISO’, ‘OTA’, ‘GAG’ ‘Ccimeaon
(German ROW) ix officially teanslated as CEMA since the Council considerx that
‘Comecon’ has pejoratise connotations. Institutional teems are ioceeaxtngly known by
the initial fettees of theft component words whether these form natural syllables or
not, and only rarely, as initially alter the Rnssian Revolution, by the first syllables at
 The translation ef proper names and institutional and ealtural teens 75
the ivords (e.g. Komsomol). Many institutions goem themselves into acronyms on
give themselves titles which can be tuened into easily eemembeeed aceonyms.
Although some onganizalions one ‘through-translated’, many one reformoloted in
Inanslalion (and often obvioos naps): Direction dii contt’ôle deoécunle’ d’Eat’aiom,
‘Directorate foe Eoeatom Safeguaeds’; Gt’oape ‘harmoncnation douanière’, ‘Working
Panty on Hoemooiootion of Costems Roles’; comiié specialioé, ‘committee of espeets’;
comité permanent. ‘standing committee’.
Positions and institutions in the Roman Catholic Church (and Vatican Staie( ace
always (a dongeroos word is inoculation iheory( ieietinannlalable (Saini’Stege, ‘Holy
See’, Pdpoilichet’ Stahl), althoagh cute is usually transferred (local colour). In thc ease
of Communist Parties, the titles dilfen but one made op of internationally transparent
Marxist collocalions (‘People’s Democeacy’, ‘Workers’ and Peasants’ State’, etc.)
tvhitst positions and hienanchies one intentranslatable. Centain ivoeds, most of them
‘originatly’ French, tend to become associated with international institutions; harmonice,
concurrent, concertalion, conjunctural (‘originally’ Genman), convention, informalice,
important, intervention, degressivity.

Others, such as conjoint, collegialite, conveoion (retraining), conjonciune, cotiiulaite,

engagement (commitment, liability), homologue, modalité, nuisance, régime, centilariots,
action, cadre (skeleton), evolution, eoploitation, ot’ganigt’amme (only foe
patents), organiome, orientation, Sozialpat-inet’, palt-imoine (assets), plafond (ceiling,
platform?), posoibilité (option), preotiation (a sociological teem already), oeciot’iel,
oubveession, calos’i,eee’, tr’ansfosmadon, cone, have still not penetrated official English in
their usual ‘European’ senses, but the basically French inspiration of Common
Market languagr is evident, although the lingua franca or koine is inevttably English
and the English influence is becoming stronger in Brunnelt. (The influence of Russian
is more apparent in Cnmecon.) However, an individual translator’s main task is to
find the authorized translation, not to make his own.

In considering how the translator handles national institutional terms, the mass of
modern political, financial, administrative and social terms, I propose first to list the
relevant translation procedures and then to offer some general criteria of reference.

(a) Translation procedures

(s) Tratsacenpeinn (adoption, transfer, ‘loan’wordn’), e.g. (often) Bundeot-at, Conoril

d’Etat. Thin may be described as the basic proceduer.
(it) Lieet’al translation. Thin is a ‘coincidental’ procedure, used when the SE term is
transparent or srmaneicalty motivated and is is standardised languagr: r.g. ‘Senate’
(F), Pt’tasident, ‘president—note also semi-institutional trrsnsin the samelexical field:
agglomeration, ‘conurbation’; Ia Chambr’e, ‘the chamber’; investit’, ‘vote in’.
76 Approaches to trarstatien

(iii) Through-translation (‘loan-translatton’, calque), e.g. ‘Nattonal Assembly’ (F),

Chambre des Pairs, ‘People’s Army’ (GDR(, ‘People’s Chamber’ (GDR) (enly foe
important institutions).
(iv) Recognized translation. The FRG Ministny toe Educatton and Scsence has
peoduced the tollowing: Bundeotag, ‘Fedenal Genman Panltumrnt’; Bundenrat, ‘Council
ot Constituent States’; Fachbrreich, ‘unisenstty department’; Rtchsergeoetz, ‘Law
on lodges’; Zicilnchatokorps, ‘cisil dolence corps’. These teanslat ons should be used ton administnatise tests. Lander is snonster ed as a couplet tvt h ‘States’. Note also:
Schoeizerinche Eidgenosnenochaft, Confederaoione St’tozera. When an ofhctal SL
body ptodaces a TL vensioo of son slits own institutional terms, the TL translator
should ‘support’ it unless he disagrees with lbevenston. (Footnote lb en eequtred.)
(v) Cultural equivalent. These are sometimes ‘abused’ (e.g. Premter Mtntstre, Prtme
Minister), depending on the degree ol cultural correspondence. Examples are:
recteur, Reksor, ‘vice-chancellor’; PDG, ‘chairman ot board’; conseil de fabrtque,
‘church council’; syndical profeosionsel, ‘trade association’; conseit de réciston, ‘anmy
mrdicul board’. Technische Hochschule, ‘Technological antsenxity’ (e.g. Bath,
Brunel); Geoamtschule, école polycaleste, ‘compsehrnsise school’.
(vi) Tranolation label. A translation label is an approximate equivalent or a new term,
usually a collocatino, for a feature peculiar to the SL culture. A new collocation would
normally be put is invroed commas, which could be dropped on later occasions, is
the hope that the term is accepted. Examples: promotion sociate, ‘social promotton’;
HLM, ‘social housing’, Gastarbeiser, ‘guest worker’; autogeorion, ‘sell-management’;
cogeotion, ‘codetermination’; aménagemens do territsire, ‘regional’ or ‘national plan-

(vii) Translation couplets. The most common form of translation couplet consists of
the transcription of an institosional term followed by its translation (which may be a
literal translation, a cultural equivalent or a translation label) in brackets; here one
would assume that the SL term would be retained for the remainder of the test and is

the relevant TL literature. Examples: Knesset (the Israeli Parliament); Folheting (she
Danish Parliament); Consett d’Etat (Council of State); Gemeinde (Germ as unit of
local government). Occasionally the translation has precedence, loltowed by the
original in brackets—the procedure may be referred to ax a TL translation couplet.
Here one assumes that the TL term is important forthe TL titeroture, both now and in
the gnture, hot may not be sufficiently well known; for example, ‘Parliamentary
Commissioner for Administration’ (ombudsman), or, in a bilingual area, such ax
Quebec, ‘witness post’ (piquet indicaseur), ‘tegists’ (hommes de loi), ‘purchaser’
(adjudicasaire) (Russell, 1979).

(viii) Translation triplets. A politically coloured term such as Schandmauer may

require a literal translation (‘mall of shame’), a transcription and the denotation
(Berlin Wall).

(ix) Through-translation (i.e loan—translation). tmportant national institosiorul terms

that are ‘transparent’ may be translated literally: Aosemblée Nationale: National
Assembly; Staatsrat, State Cnuncil; Vothohammer, People’s Chamber,
 The trneslatine nf prnper carries ted iestitutinral aed cultural terms 77

(x) Deletion A term of lit le importance in the TL cultnee, e.g. Staainraat or Acs’ocato in front of a sureome, or Jugends’eihe ceremony in the GDR or Habilitation may hr
deleted in translation, provided it is marginal to the lest, and some indication of
function gives ashore required.

(si) Naturalization. The process of ‘angliciasng’ feces gn names, e.g. Aristotle, by

supplying them svith English suffises is no longer current, although any SL term (e.g.
names of tours), svhioh is frequently used and/or considered important, is usually
prorouncod as an English svord. Note difference in pronunciation between ‘Hamburg’
and ‘Klagerfurt’.

(sii) Avr’onymo. Iris common practice to retain the acronym ofan SL institution (e.g.
SPD, CDU, FNLA), schere necessary adding thr translation of the title (e.g.
Christian Democrats, etc—most but not all European political parties havr ‘trunspurerr’
titles) or the function, if the term is obscare and less impurtant, e.g. CNAA,
‘national body awarding dogrers of colleges and polytechnics’. KG, Knight of the
Grdrr of the Garter, highest order of British knighthood. Where an institutional
acronym already has a recognized translation equivalesi, it must hr used, due
allrstion brinc paid to the official equivalent I e.g. GDR, CMEA) raihrr han the
more ‘popular’ equivalent East Germany, Comecon) where appropriate. When an
acronym forms a derivative )vegeaiuie, umicard, énar’que, onicrirn) the derivative is
usually split into two or three words depending on contest.

)siii) Metaphor’. Metaphor is rot usually associated with institutional terms, but the
name of an inslitution may be personified to refer to its leadership or director(s)
whilst the building or street where iris accommodated may also denote the insulation
or its director(s) (e.g. the Pentagon). Proust was already satirizing this fashion in A
lambs-c den jeccnea filleo en flour (vol. 1, p. 45). Un cii d’alar’me portia de
Monirciior’io Italian Parliament; L’émoaionfuageandezu Ponaau.r Chantr’ea.
prewar Russian Foreign Gffice, Leningrad; Le double jerc dana Ia maniès’e du
Ballplalz = Ballhaunplaiz, Habsbnrg Foreign Minisiry. Note also l’Elysée, French
President; Hotel Matignon, Prime Minister; Quai d’Or’aay, Foreign Ministry; Rue de
Rir’oli, Ministry of Finance; Bzaleghe Oacur’e, Italian Communist Party; Piazza del
Genii, Ituliar Christian Democrats.

(sic) Lastly, I suggest that alternative or supplementary information can be supplied

by ihe trasslator in three ways: (a) within the test, )b) as a footnote to the page, ihe
chapier or the book, or )c) as a glossary. The first method is the bent provided ii can
be supplied briefly and unobtrusively without holding up the flow at lbe narrative: as
an alternative term, in brackets, as a onrwurd definition (i.e. uciliceu, etc.), as a
paraphrase, participial phrase, defining adjectival clause, etc.

)b) Reference criteria

Many considerations for translating national institntiosal terms oscillate between

paIne uppasutions, and there are delicate stages between each 0f them, which have to
be weighed against each other, as well as the usher cnnsidrratinns.
78 Approaches a

(i) On the one nsteeme an expert readershtp eeqtaiees the SL term, tchtlst at the ether,
a lay eeadernhip needs a TL explanation. as detatled as tn tnterest tctll allow. tn
between, an edacated non-specialized readership may need a teanslatton label or
cultural equtxalettt.

(it) If the teem is at great tmpoetance te the FL eeadee, it shauld be translated where possihte, e.g. the nomes of the publtc cotporotions: La Secut’t e Soctale, the French
health servtce. EDF. the Feench electeicity hoard; PTT. the postal seet’tce; SNCF,
Fnench railways, Cooteil do Ia Reoer’i’e Fedet’ule, USA Federal Reserve. II tt ts of
aserage importance. it should ha transcrtbed, possthly an a teunslotton coaplet; 1
ot little import ance and does oat contribati. to local colosr, and parttcalarly it it tu a
thind country tnstitnttoral teem, it could well be translated; thus, la Galet’te dot Cet’ft.
the Gallery 0g Stags; the Daima, Japanese pee-wan parliament, etc.
(iii) Instttational teems may vary between transparency and opaqueness Ion Romance
languages (e.g. canceuttan minter’e, ‘mining concession’; undft’anco domictlr, ‘free at
destination’). Transparency may be degined as the SL teem shining’ through (as an
ami fidelr) the corresponding TL term, thereby renembltog tt closely in form e.g.
‘internal competition’, but cancaue’u dx Foedu, ‘ord from the Fund’.
Note that political parties’ names are usually translated if they are made up at
culturatly orerlapping political terms such us ‘liberal’, conservative. etc. ‘Labour
Party’ is transcribed to die Labour Patty (G) and le Patti te’uvutlliotr (F). us ‘Labour’ is
used in anonur-sense (tracaillirte has no other meaning). Most F uropean political
parties are also reterred to by their acronyms (see also Glance, 197b)
In Germanic languages, institutional teems may be semantically motisuted, and
translate easily: e.g. Staataochatz, Staatokaooe, ‘the public revenues’, whilst others,
such as Geheimrar, Seaaut’at and Regtee’urtgte’ut, are deceptive and cannot be trans
lated ax ‘pricycouncitlors’ though alt are translated us such to Caouell’t Gee’eerao
Dictionary (sexised 1978 edition). Lastly, where a term invites straight petmary to
primary sense translation, such a translation is probably ustified it the term is
sufficiently itttpurtant: e.g. Velkopolizer. ‘People’s Poltce’: Burdeut’atlFRGl. ‘Federal
Council’.

(it) The n’ariens drgreen of cultural equivalence base to be borne in mind and have to
be retated to the expectatiaon of the readership. To what extent ix a ValuohoehoiAule
‘adult evening clanxrx’, or a Poltklteik ‘an outputirnts’ department’ On the othee
hand, the translator bus to tuke tree ucvoune true nutionul pride and local culture (or
cutout), which ix an argument foe transcription: (e.g. ‘Open University’. Maiuao di’ 1
Culture, Knmbioar, kibbutz, ctr’eulou rnfanrileu). On the other hand, he has to
recognize chaustnism, snobbery and cammeectulism (e.g. management, engireer’trg
‘Public School’), whene he normally has to conform with established TL practice, hut
should, like a reliable dictionary, indicate any prejudice implied
)s) Conctsron, neutness, ‘lit’, euphony (therefore the difficulty of translating briefly
tote the TL) these qualities predispose ‘popular feeling’ (i.a the media) to adapt the
SL term: e.g. oamizifar (naturalizes well), Berufuvre’but, roedici candorri, Osuiedluog,
Kulturkaeopf, numer’utclautuo, .4occhluou (Latin’s only point of nuperiarity over
most ether languages maybe its concision); on the other hand, any iostttutionat term
 The teanslatian of psapns names and institutional and nattantl tennns 79
hat is pondonoiis sod lengthy is likely to be teanslated, and usually, us is non the case,
idetttihed by an acnonynn

(si) Lemis’s discussion (1979) of GDR language naises the question ol hots to teanslate
teems coloueod by capitalist on communist ideology. If one assainnes one is
not teanslating panels ton eqaicalent-olfect (on the TL neaden(, one has to clanify the
cognitinc cotnponnntot the pains SsAandnsaaot’ atid Sshuian’all (Benlin Wall) on
Punkon’c,’ Rs’gone and ks 005w daustehe Asbestos usid Baset’nstaat ll’iDRI

Such tennis can he analysod scmiologically into setsastic od peagmattu components, and a teunslatit,ti ‘tespict’ (e.g. Mentchotthandlot’, teadens in people, East Genman
tListcnmuodat,
eem toe poeson’ assisting GDRKanaet’tt,
omsgnanis) mayBoo’tchst’ai,
beneqasend. Othen instPes’tosakhef
itutional typical of the capitatonlist anthe
socialisFRG,
t system natSiaant’at,
hen than ideology, Poliibut’o,
e.g. Landsag,
Meht’laftt’etplatts, Vs’t’estttgsstsg Volktesgettss’ Betnebe, Ps’amts’ofondo for the GDR ate
translated ccoeding to the c’ntcnta I base listed, cane beinf taken to attnsbute them to
the appnapniate Genman state
Genenally. it been is a high dcfnce of cultural eqaicalence. thene isa case for a
(titles of ministnses( on fan tnanslating by the oquitalent teem (e.g. ts’ihsunul
d’insianee, ‘Fnench magisteatos’ count’, hut a tniombt’o do l’lnttitui is eat a ‘EnlIsts of
the Royal Society’).

(sii( Hene, again, function is mane impontant than descniptson on composition. Thus
‘Black Rod’, ‘gentleman ushcr fan House of Lands’. ‘Yoltoss Pages’, ‘adsentising
section of telephone dseectory’; ‘father of chapel’, ‘shop stosnand of pnintens’ associa(siii(

Some conssstency in teanslating at tnanscnthing institutional teems is desinublo in

proceeding similarly snith sets of tennis, e.g. translation fan all names of ministries,
transcription foe all the gt’attdet ecolet; bat this cnitenion may clash n’ith that of
‘tnanspanency’, us in Bandett’at inhich is tnunsparent and Bandeotag sshich is not A
typical sncsrnssstcncy is its Anesl (1969), mImic depat’tsmrottt, cantons and cssmmanc’,
ann taxtapesed. One could translate departments and cantons: (a) departments at
least tenon Itequently. (b( both ann ‘tnanspanent’. (c( in this contest they mould not he
confused nsith tIbet ‘departments’ on Smiss cantons, and (d( they should, it possible.
be in line nub ‘commune’, but in specialized tests, the tendoncy is she resorse For
Italy, houenen, nogions. pran’inces and comma nes are perhaps acceptable Generally,
series at hienancbins of teems in one lexical field are handled consistently. Thus:
sagion, depasiemeni, canton, at’eondsussment, eomnnsssie, Lurid, Ksest, Gemeindo;
canset’t’ateat’ da sAdteass, r’egstnoas da domaino, sas’cesllanis, concierges, gat’des (for
Loire chdissaaa(; dmt’ectear’ da cabinet, dtrectear’adjoint, consetller’ technique, shusge do
msnsion. Hasnenee, the considerations at importance and transpanencc already
mentioned may clash ssith a consistent treatment of ihe abase senses.
Glosses may bane to be added to sets of transcribed terms. Again. bet should
describe in conformity itith the tent’s intention ha function not the farm on the
composition—of the teem as besefly as possible. Take, fan example, the hierarchy
aadsisat’, malice den r’eqafnoo, Cansesllss’ d’Etat: the Snst lana tennis are in my opinion
80 Appmaehrs a

unteanslatable, althoagh Haeeap’s teanslates them as ‘commtsstoner end ‘eapporteat”

of the Conceit d’Etat; the hod cae, bat shoald cot be translated. When the theec
tinclnde
eems are analyseniority,
sed componenttal ynotate
for the parposofe of stsoek
applytng es(job
ses tat tespecification(,
atueesof the glos , the translasalary
toe has sesedeffeeonteal.
ral options. The dtmenseonsnamber
of the theee teemsof
posts eeqnieed quahttcattons—in these respects the three teems are dtsrtngatshed. Bat
the gfoss is attn likely to enclade the factoen common to the th roe teems: membeeshtp of ho Canaetl d’Etat (the htghest Feench admintstraroe toaetf. membeeshep of a
ge-and cot-pt, geadnafe at a ge-and ecole, etc. The make-op of the gloss atlI depend not
only on the parpose and geneeaf content of the test, deperdtag on tshtch of the
dimensions (e.g. mock or salaeies( refereed to ate emphasteed. feat also on the degece
at spectaliaatton and dtfticalty of the test. The lattee cell determtae the amoant of
detatl in the gloss, tn pareiculae te relatton to the reader of the traaslattoer echo, thoagh
he tnay be an expert tn the sabject. is likely to helens melt informed than the reader of
the original.

In bilingaal areas, most insterational terms, as trefl as the names tel tossas and
streets, h ase eqatsalcntx in both langaaget. France and the Federal Repablts of
Germany, being neighbours, teanslate many at each other’s admirtsfrattse teems
For-atame flicteit’t dee Eaua et dee Foe-fee: Getcee’beaaloa’httamt fettpet’tton da Teatatl:
Regiet’angehaupteeht’erdt- Chef de ge-oars’ All these teems aoald normally be trans
cetbed rather than ttanslated into Engltnh In translating from a test originating in a
bilingual caantey, there in a ntrong argument toe sapplyteg both the appropetate

(n( The mare one country han to ase another’s instetuttonal terms, and the more
important they are, the more one is jastihed in translating rather than transcething
them. Thus the names at ministries, same public institutions, important cisil
parts and departments, may be translated. Farther, a token-nerd tllustrateng a
caantry’s practices, n’hich is not usually translated, may become a theme-word,
asuatty translated, as tt gaint in TL circalation: e.g. Fr’etetdeetpaoe, ‘foreegrer’s pats’ or
‘identity papers’. atearr’ltchee’ Wohnnita. ‘domicile far fan parposes’ and the tendrney
to translate the names of nell-knoan churches, cathedrals, pabltc baeldtrgs.
When transcription in initially required because the foreign term is not eranspareet.
e.g. BundeuasctaltfhrAe’hett, it is nsetul to pat hr Engltsh rqatsalent lirst ‘Federal
Irstitnte at Labour’—addtng the transcription in brackets. Farther refereot.e tr the
article should be to the Englesh term, shartened to the ‘Federal Irstitate’ If the
instetatian is important and it treqaently mentioned te the TL literarare the
transtatinn ts Iskety to became establtshed and subsequent transcription unnecessary.
Cantrariwine, cheer the instituttonal term is unlikely to breamecarrene te the Ergltsh
it is adsisable to transcribe tt (e.g. Scha’er’herchadtgtrngeteta(. gte’tng the
translation in brackets (‘Serionsly Disabled Persons Acr’(. and to make any farther
reterence to it in the saucer langaage.
(xi) Sometimes a combination of national feeling, both partesarship and opposition
(or cammeecial interesr( as nell an enphony and ‘fet’, play a part in the nor-translation
uf certaen key instituttonal teems: Führer’, Dues’, Caudtlfo, Ayatollah (also strtually
regarded as proper names(, apartheid.
 The trarstatiar at pauper names and nstitctiaral and csltaial teams 81
(sit) When a translator is in doabt, he sheuld teaesceshe rathee than teaitslate
institutional terms. Nida (1975a) has isritten that liieealaess and the attempt to

transtae serythingate hetaestaot’sncots fa ts.Ateatislatiensho ldbeatemptedonlyifthenemte madeqa teydescribesthefan ticsaftheaeignalmock,e.g‘Weakenpaeticpation’fanMitbe tim ong,andnat helastlymeant gtes
‘na-deteeminatioa’ A teanslatinn into a teem peculiar ta the ceutttny at the TL, e.g.
GPO tor PTT, Wan Ottice for Mosintere do Ia Guano (at the time at the Dtnyfus
affair), the ‘Tenasary’ ton lea Financea, should he acoided. In sach cases one usualty
teaks foe a ‘neutral’, setornational teem that coald apply to many countries—e.g.
Ministny of Posts and Telecommueications. MinssteeofFsnaace (sestead at
Chancellor of tho Euchequer).
(siii) Whilst the translation of foreign institutional terms is subject to many sometimes
ecidently conflicting considerations, and stiff In aces a lange aena ot chotce, one
has to guard against three common mistakes: (1) ness translation of terms that already
base eecogniaed translations, (2) use of TL terms that hase a strong focal colour, (3)
‘preposterous’ isord-fee-word translations, i.e. iranstationese.
(xii’) Lastly. since this in an area of ‘standardined language’ that is likefy in become
increasingly significant, particularly in pluralist societies, sits desirable that translating
teams employed by national goseenments should make olticial translations 01 their
principal institutional terms so that larnign translators should at least be able to use
the caernct snesions if they isish in respect the SL country’s interests.

Non-institutional cssltssral terms usuatly present fniser problems, and the considerations
I hase fisted also hold good toe their translation. Nei’eetheless, there ace many
probtems. It is, I think, the translator’s duty not to let mends like noaceau riche or
pai’i’enu (prrj.)5 men the language again, sinco there is nothing particularly French
about thaw referents. Again, both historians and their translators base a problem in
deciding whether to transcribe the cam as of products on of asses af people that hirsr
sery tittte specifically focal about them but their origins. Thus, let us take as an
illustratian F. Braudel’s great Capitaliom and Material Life (translated by M.
Kochun). Both Beuudel and his translator proside numerous translation couplets such
as Randr’dlkei’, the marginal people known to German geographers as the genchschtlou
praple—’peaple without history—where the SL teems are en rained purely to gise
local colnur (Randi’dlker’ may connect with other esidence, but not geochichiloa),
srnce there is nothing particularly German about either referent. In other cases,
translatian couplets are offered presumably for the sake of the sei’rntnenth-centary
(modernized) terms: ‘Health certificates’, Genundheitapdnne in Germany, car’tm de
nalud in Spain? Local di snares are en produced without a gloss: the bonae, dendo, tao
Harion. Local ecological terms areprelerred to theirTLequisaleers (ot. sarinus
wards for ‘desert’ usrd in English, e.g. steppe, tundra). My imptession is that Beaudel
in many cases simply nat’ourn the sounds of the foreign (German, French, Italian,
Russian, Chinese, Dutch, English, era.) wards, an one would euprar af a leading
82 Approaches to translation

Artnalet historian. In many other cases tire use of local teems foe foods (e.g. four types

ofrecognize
Ftench bread in tmetalingual
he fourteenth century)language:
—’compostt On. not‘goods
shape—or fthat
or t’anoushasechanged
types of cult satian is jutostifiemeanteg
d. The translator,several
howet’er, sltptones.
s up by fatltng to
correct entt’emeto, r’agodte’. The meanings have changed to French but not to Eegltsh.
Occasionally, svords like aiguiet-e (esser) and Kachelofert (earthenuore stove) are
retained, possibly because as token-nerds, they hove a peesod rather thor a local
flar’our. It seems a pity that in other vases, ttraudrl cod hts translator quote. say, a
Dante line: come on molin the il unto gir-a, where translatton (‘hke a mdl turned by
the wind’) could easily be interpolated into the tent; and refer to Jot-tuna, ventcto,
r’agione, oicar’fa as the keywords of commercial Ide, apparently erlytog on these
transparency to French and English readers. However, Mtrtatn Kochan’s rothustosm
for tronsetiptt005 is welcome, and her translation couplets are neatly and sortously
introduced. I sheuld perhaps conclude by pointing out that it to the translator’s, as
the lexicographer’s, duty to discrimtnate any cultural teem whose sense flagrantly.
explicitly or connotatisely infringes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’
not a question of modifying the force of such words as ‘dike’, ‘gook’. ‘kike’, ‘blog’
(workingclass, now defunct?) or ‘hue’, not ol excludingthem from dictionaries, nor of
suppressing the connotative senses of woods like ‘queen’, ‘dame’, ‘queer’, ‘altenated’
ffar from it), but ol alerting the TL reader to rhete anrihuman, not just dreogarory
significance. (All such weeds should be labelled ‘prej.’ in dictionaries.) Contrary to
even now fashionable opinion, objectivity, in as far as it can estst, can be based only
on human decency and morality.

Turning to more general cultural terms, one notes first that local ecological teens are
usually retained: ocean bane their own winds, lakes, moors, types of accommodation:
further, their natural and prepared food products, intentions, appliances, customs,
etc , keep their names, sometimes with an cody change of meaning (r g. sauna) as
noted by Collard (1965) and a later change of function, e.g. Stand (noted by
Dahrendorf).

Thrsn ore token-weeds which first odd local colour to any descoiptton of their
constrict of origin, and may hate to be explained, depending on the readership and
the type of text. Later, if the products ace generally exported, neither they roe their
names are any longer felt to be foreign, and they become the adopted words which are
common in all languages. They will on the whole appear more olten in non-literary
texts (social history, etc.), where local colour is important, than in the type of fiction
where the message, the diducoic rlement, is more important than the caltxealelrment:
words such as pneurxatique, acocat, Maxelle, impertaut enough in descriptions of
French social life, could be rendered by labels such ax ‘express letter’, ‘lawyer’ and
‘card-game’ in a short story. Names foe clothing, vehicles, dishes, art forms may
temporarily become vogue-words, but when the vogue is aver they become historical
terms like fichu, br’ougham and Spiegel.

Further, one may consider the strange caur of transferred words whtch have 00
peculiar cultural characteristic; words like défeerre, démar’chc, r-appr’ocherxexe, coup
d’etat and estente are accounted for by the farm er supremacy of French in diplomatic
language; ‘fairplay’, ‘trend’ and ‘job’ went into Grrman during the Allied occupation.
 The translation of proper names and institutional and cultural tentns 83
At various times, foreign visitors have felt that certain moods were peculiar to the
character of a foreign culture, and have imported the words into their own language,
often keeping the referenve to the foreign calture (such as Gematlichkeii,
Gs’sindlivhkeit, nachiomo, as well as the French diplomatic terms previously mentioned).

In my opinion the words mentioned are not pecaliar to the foreign culture but denote
a concept thai is missing in the ‘home’ language. They are often imported for snobbish
or vogue reasons to 19ff no conceptual or mental terms can be identified with one
culture, and any new conceptual terms should be translated. I include not only new
psychological, scientitic, political, artistic, emotional and intellectual terms, bat also
socabulanirn in the fields of any new actisities and customs open to loan-words for all
types of espontable products and inventions and for cultural and institutional terms,
whose refereats are likely to be replicated in other langoage communities.
Thus the French Government’s attempt to ‘ban’ Americanisms is well-intentioned and
represents a challenge to translators (rather than the French Academy which consists
mainly of amateors) who has’r for so tong, sot only in France, failed in one of their
responsibilitirs, that isis dealing with foreign words (there is no good reason why, for
instance, ‘pipeline’ should be toanscribrd in any language, unless pipelines are to
remain alien to the culture). tt is also a challenge to adseetisres, public relations,
inteltrctuat snobs, rtc. (brilliantly satiriard by Shakespeare in Much Ado about
Nothing and other works), who use forrign words to accumalate prestige and profit.
Normalty a translator can treat cultural trems more freely than institutional terms. He
is not called to account for faulty decisions, whether he is translating imaginative
literature or grnerat works (e.g. history). Since little can be rsptained to the
spectator, cultural terms are rather more likely to be translated or given a cultural
equisalrnt in a play than in fiction. But goner ally the most fasourrd procedure for a
recently noted teem peculiar to a foreign culture (given nationat pride, greater
interests in other countries, increased communications, etc.) is likely to be teanscription,
coopted with disecret esplanation within the test. If the term brcomes
widespread it may be adopted in the TL. This method is thr appropriate sign of
respect to foreign cultures.
7. The translation of metaphor

Aslseeit,thrmainand ooeseeionspoepofmetaphortsto..-.........quality
more comprehettsisely and concisely and in a more complex way than ix posxblr
byasing literal language. The process isinitially emotive, stnce, byrefetTtng to one object
in terms of aoother (‘a woodeo face’, ‘starryeyed’), one appears to be telling a
originat metaphors are often dramatic and shocking in effect, aod, ence they rstabhsh
points of similarity betxsren one object and anotherwithoat expltcttly stating sshat these
resembtances are (‘he leadsadog’xlife’, bulelleadachirn),theyappeartobeimpreCtse,
ifnotinaccarate,sincethryhaveiodeterminateandundeterminablefrontters. However,
there is no question that good writers axe metaphors to help the reader to gain a more
accarate insight, both physical aod emotional, into, say, a character or a sstaa
Further, is is not difficult so show that a one’wopd metaphor, once it is accepted as a
technical term, so becoming a mosooym (e.g. ‘dog’, deco, cane), as a ‘track’, ‘tab’ or a
‘mine car’, and becomes a more or less dead metaphor, may be added to the techoical
lerminologyofasemanticfieldandthereforecontributestogreater accuracyinthriixeof
language.

I have never seen this purpose of metaphor stated in any textbook, dictionary or
encyclopaedia. The issar iscloudedhythe ideaof mesaphoras anornamrnl, asafigarrof
speech, or teope, as the process of implying arosemblance between one object and
another, us a poetic device. Further, linguists assume that scientific orteshnological texts
mill contain mainlyliteral language, illastraled byan occasional simile (amcrecautious
form of metaphor), whilst the purpose olmetaphoris merely to liven up other types of
lenIn, to make them more colourful, dramaticand witty, notoriously in lournalism. All
emoliveexpressiondependsoometaphor,beingmainlyfigurasivelanguagrtemperedby
psychological teems. If metaphor is used for the purpose of colouring language (rather
thansharprningitiooedeetodosceihrthrlifeolthcwoeldcrthenriodoioeo accaealely),il
cannot be taken all that seriously.

Words are not things, but symbols of things. On Martinet’s model we may regard
words as the first articulation of meaning, and since all symbols are metaphors or
metonyms replacing their oblects, all words are therefore metaphorical. Howeser, as
lranslatoesweknowthatwordsincontext arrneithrrthingsnorusuallythrsamesymbols
as individual words, but components of a larger symbol which spans a collocation, a
clause or asentence. and ixa diffrrrot symbol than that ofan isolated word. This is ho
second arliculation of meaning and to this extent language itself is a metaphorical web.
Lastly, an Oombrich has pointed out (1978), metaphorislilrrallytranslation, and dead
metaphors, i.e. literal language, are the staple of accurate translation.

Metaphor is in fact based on a scientific observable procedure: the perception of a

resemblance between two phenomena, i.e. objects or processes. Sometimes the image
84
 The transtatiar of metaphor 85

maybe physical (e.g a ‘battery’ of cameras), bat often it is,chosen for its connotations rather than its physicat characteristics (e.g. in ‘she isa cat). Violence is exercised on
rinealitvarious
y when the objecontests
cts or proces es arthee identrmotis’e
if ed with each oteffect
her, which insubsides,
the hrst instance prand
oduces aastronew
ng emotiteem
ve effect. Grthat
adually,descnbes
when the metaphor reatity
is repeated
more closely has been created, e.g. étonsd which inaseventeeth-century test mightbe translated as ‘thander-steack’, but is now translated an ‘astonished’.
The sass majority ot metaphors are either anthropomorphic (personification), the
first process, or reific (mental to physicat), the converse process, both processes
eoietoecisg the emotive effect.

This stated, in considening the transtation of metaphor, t divide metaphor into five
types: dead, cliché, stock, recent and original, and propose the following terms:
(a) Object—that is, the item which is described by the metaphor. (Referred to by
Beckman aed Callow (1974) as ‘topic’.)
(b) Image—that is, the item in teems of which the object is described (Richards’s
‘vehicle’).
(c) Sesne—that is, Richards’s ‘tenor’, Beckman and Callow’s ‘point of similarity’,
which shows is what particular aspects the object and the image are similar.
)d) Metaphor—the word(s) taken from the image.
(e) Mctosym—.a ore-word image which replaces the object, which may later become
a dead metaphor, e.g. the ‘fin’ of a motor cycle. In mary cases, a metonym is
‘figurative’ but sot metaphorical, since the image distinguishes an outstanding
leature of the object, e.g. Rue de Ricoh for the French Fiuaucial Ministry or
Boss or doe Busd for the Federal German Government. tt may also be a
synecdoche,paenpro loto, say, ‘asait’ for a ‘yacht’, or a symbol (‘the sevenscas’ is
‘the whole world’) which the trarstator may have to esplaie within the test, asd
would normolioe (‘sail’ assac’ee).

Farther t distinguish between one-word metaphors (anusny girl) ned complex

metaphors, which range from two or more wards or idioms, e.g. to ‘catch a fish’,
through nearly all the proverbs to complete poems (notabty ulseealles Gipfels istRab,
where the wood, or sleep, or death maybe the object) and perhaps allegories. Note,
also, that I distinguish between the image and the metaphor, which is the figurative
word used in the image; in ‘rooting out the faults’, the object is ‘faults’, the image is
‘tooting up weeds’, the metaphor is ‘rooting out’, the sense componensially is (a)
eliminate, (b) with tremendous personal effoet. Therefore, in the TL version, some
such verb as élireisoe, estfeeses would not do, unless the phnusc was of macgmat
impoetance in the toys. Here, us elsewhere, a translator needs to have a disceiminating
sense of peiority, so distinguish carefully major and minor factors/components/purameteenineach
test.

hI has been said that theee-quaeters of the English language consists of used
metaphors. In lad, the deadest metaphors in any language are the opaque words it
86 Approaches to translation

has imported from other languages: e.g. foe Enghth ‘consider’, to look at the ntaes;
‘examine’, ‘to assay with the tongae of a balance’; ‘think’ from Old English and
Gothic, to ‘make light’. In translation, the tmagen are diseeganded.
There are three types of transparent dead metaphors. First, words lske ‘eeflect’ as
‘think’ or ‘shine’ as ‘escel’ where, as it were coincidental y, the image as melt as the sense is eetaiued in some second languages: r’efleehir, br’il er. Secondly, she thousands
of words denoting objects which cuesot ‘normally’ be concerted to figueatcce
meaning, if the denotative meaning is retained. These ace one-word metaphors, or
better, metonymx, since they replace their objects: examples feom motor-cycle
technology ace: fin, frame, poet, skirt, seal, clutch, worm, collar, fork, idler, sal,
cradle. All these words presumably superseded generic words like ‘corer, lock,
connection, spinal, band’, etc , peeviously used to describe the reles:ant objects. Now,
dead metaphors ace no part of translation theory, which is concerned with choices and
decisions, not with the mechanics otlanguages, but tam bound to point out that these
technical mesonyms ate an immemorial stop fos the translator: considen technical
teems such ax Muller, Feder’, Gesol, Asge, Karoe, TineS, or again the extensions of the
word for ‘dog’ in five European languages:

English: mechanical device foe holding, gripping, fastening: clump, drag, hammer
of gaulock.
French: paws, latch, catch, hammer, trolley, towing block.
German: track, tub, mine car.
italian: catch, cramp, cock, hammer.
Spanish: Nil Ion perr’o, but ‘trigger, bracket, corbel’ for can.
Runsian: Nil for nobaka, a dog, but the diminutive sobachka has ‘paws’, ‘trigger’,
‘catch’, ‘trip’, ‘arresring device’, ‘paws of ratchet’.

Perhaps items in all mono- and bilingual dictionaries should be cleanly manked off in
four separate sections: physical, Sgurasive, colloquial and technical, so that those who
consult thenr are left in nu doubt aboat the prescuer of technical and colloquial
meanings for most of the commonest words.

The last enormous group of dead transpanens metaphors ate non ‘technical wosds such
as ‘head’, ‘foot’, ‘bottom’, ‘arm’, ‘circle’, ‘square’, ‘deep’, ‘broad, etc., which
potentially have both concrete and figurative senses and which broadly appear to havr
universal applications or aspirations for all languages bus which again offer she
translator certain traps, often owing to eulloeational ioflueuce, e.g. ‘to the lettrr’, us
pied ide Ia fence; ‘depth of water’, hauiear d’eau; ‘be out of my depth’, nEro pus ala
hauteur’, etc. Such dead metaphors are sometimes brought so varying degrees of life
with a supplemensary contest, which produces polysemy: thus ‘large-scale’ but ‘high
an she social scale’, ‘he sifted the facts’ bar ‘he scrupulously sifted she facts’. A dead
metaphor brought so life weigh up, ‘rub our’, i.e. ‘kill’ insleud or ‘remove)
immediately becomes a iranslarion-rhenry problem; desirably, the polysemy is
transferred, if the TL slang will take it; asoreiben, but the translator may have so
m000uemizo with the xcuse silgen, or ‘split’ the sense with auslöschen. How glaring isa
‘glaringerrar’?Offenbar,auffallend, grub oogr’ell?
 ‘Ike translatinn of metaphnr 87

Notthread’,
e that technichutat deadthemetaphormetaphor
s can also come ‘asnearesuch
r to Isfe’ whendoesthey becnotome cbecome
omptex That the saexstranstatson
at ‘image’ is enhanced probtem.
when ‘mate or femate’ modsfses ‘screw

Inextconeidercli hé,whichisamurkyareabetwe ndeadandstockmetaphor.Clichésus altyconsi toftwotypesofster otypedcolt catsons;ftgutasveadlects eptustieralnoun(simplesmetaphor),e.g ‘filthyacre’;orfsguratsveserbptus

figurative noun (complex metaphor), e.g. ‘esptore aft avenues’,
unturned’, ‘stick out a mite’, etc. Further, some togae words (e.g. ‘parameter’,
‘strategy’, ‘infrastructure’, ‘modet’, ‘profile’, ‘crucial’, etc—ad nauoeam) become
clichés through inappropriate use or
As I see it, a translator is entitled to gel rid of cliché in any informatsve test where
only facts )or theories) are caered and, more riskily, in a ‘socially operatsve* or
‘vocative’ test (where the vocative function of language predamsnates) such as
propaganda or publicity, where the translator might be considered to be ustsgted en
helping the author obtasn the optimum reaction from the reader.
A translator is not entitled to touch clichés in expressive tests, authoritative
statements, laws, regulations, notices, etc. However, in his rendering of less weighty
tests, a translator thaws his elegance, resourcefulness, ability to be brief, simple and
clear, etc., and how better than reducing ‘the tong arm of coincidence’ to eatremer’
Zufallor ‘theow up the rpoage’ tooich beaiegrer’kldr’en or ‘draw the net wider’ to
‘increase the catchment area’ or perhaps augmenter l’airr de recr’ulewest; or again, to
translate ‘parameter’ by Ma)lolab, and ‘profile’ by ‘brief description’.

In discnssing the translation of stock metaphors, I propose to list the seven main
procedures fat rtsnstaring meruphos. Obviously, many stock metaphors are clichés,
hart am now assuming that the translator is attempting to render them as accurately
as possibfe, nor to pare them down. ‘She wears the trousers and he plays second
fiddfe’ may be absurd, hut both metaphors still seem to do a goad job. Farther, in
each case 8 distinguish between oneword and comples metaphors. Stock metaphors
may have cultural (cultural distance or cultural overlap), universal (or at least widely
spread) and subjective aspects.
Iris possible that no metaphors are aniversat. One would espect ‘birth’ to be
‘awakening’, ‘sickness’ to be moral as welt as physical, ‘steep’ to be ‘rest’ or ‘death’.
Bat where ‘a culture is driven mad’ )Auden) or the scribes dintort natural feelings,
images may nor base the senses suggested. Although even ‘dirt’ usually represents
‘imparity’ or some kind of ‘Iaboo’, in some abnormally poor African societies iris a
protection agairsr cold. I assume that when all societies reach a cerrain similar stage of
physical health and wellbeing, three wifl be some basic universal meraphars,
The nm is derived Iron a conbination ol K. Reiss (1977) ‘drr aperture Ted’ and Lyons’s 1968)
88 Approaches to translation

consequently easing the teanslator’s task, steen he ccli be able to eetain the
image—i.e. rendee them ‘semantically’, ashich is not the tame as hteeally—thas. boae,
Kot, farsgo, ‘mad’ cviii have the tame connotations in eveey laegaagr.
The follossing are, I think, the peocedares toe translating metaphor, in order of
preference
(1) Repettduciug the sante stage in the TL provided the image has comparable
freqaencyand carrencyintheapproPriateregister.ThisProcribmeuscommonfor
osemord metaphors: ‘ray of hope’, rayon d’oopoir’, Hoffnangsstr’abl; ‘gleam’, lcear’, Si’hir t nrt’; ‘nanny smile’, oonnigen Ldchrlrt, etc.; whilst in many cases (for ‘held’,
‘‘His
province’life, ‘area’hangs
. ‘side’, for iuonstance)aththread’,
e metaphor is harScm
dly perceptLeben
ible. Transfhdngi
er of complanes meteinem
aphors or idioFadrn,
ms is much rSaarer, andi’iedependsor nest
on calturaqcl overalap,ene.g.
91, or on a aniversal reperienee, e.g. ‘cast a shadow over’, jeier’ ane ombr’e oar’,
Softatron übot’ croon errfon. As Franeeseato (1977) has stated, aniversals like ‘head’
are cognitive rather than linguistic and languages use different words (e.g. brad,
chief, main, master) for metaphorical eqaivalcocos. Often the ooage coo be only
partially reproduced: manger Ia lame oar Ir doo, ‘fleece’.
It is more difficult to reproduce one-word metaphors where the sensr is an event or
quality rather than entity. Howevrr, the morr auivrrsal the sense, the more likely the
transfer: ‘golden hair’, chceeax dot’, goldrnro Haar’; ‘die’, moor’ir’, nier’ben (mary
figurative senses). Bat one cannot reproduce to ‘elbow one’s way’ into any foreifr
language, unless the metaphor isliteralioed (enjouanideo coaden, miidrm Ellbogos(.
Providing there is ‘strong’ cultural overlap, metonyms such as the ‘pen’, the ‘sword’,
‘guns’, ‘butter’, etc., which are symbols of concepts, not objects (note that ‘dove: is
a metonym colic writing, but in art, and a complrs nymbol), can often hr transferred.
Similes, which are not emotive and are more prudent and eaatioas than metaphors.
must normallybe transferred in anytype of trst,bat in sci—tech testsibe simile should
be culturally familar to the TL reader. Thus Dan Lichi i’rs’hdlt oich vie em Scho:ar’m
ron Teilchrn must become ‘Light behaves like a swarm—not ‘a lot’ or
collection—of particles’. Since the whole point of a simile, like that of a metaphor, is
to produce an accurate description it is futile to tone it down with a smoother

Lastly, I notr the special ease of animal abuse. Why, asked Leech (19b6), is ‘you son
of a bitch’ or ‘you swine’ abusive, whilst ‘you son of a kangaroo’ on ‘yea polar bear’
is not? Now one notes that animal mrtaphors or metonyms (ef. ‘I saw that cow
coming’) are not inrrrtranslatable, but have connotations provided they are on marked
for see or age. Thus pigs appear to be universally associated with aneleanness and
stench (the moest ‘physical’ taboos), but ‘bitches’ and ‘ears’ are too specific to be
onten transterred. Domestic animals like dogs, eats, sheep, donkrys, goats, cows,
while they are liked individually, like slaves, women, kaffirs, foreignrrs, servants and
the working classes, are intrinsically inferior to men and represent inferior qualities:
knusrry, spite, enedality, stupidity, lechery, ugliness in English, but different qualities
rn other languages. Horses, the royal animal, are strong in English, healthy and
dilrgrnr in French, and possibly hard-working in Oerman, though Ross the noblr
 The translation of metaphor 89

steed is a bloekhead Insects ate cetmin in ott tangoages. hot bees ood onts (emoig) are
cirt000sesceptions. The farmyard is no mote sympathetic, geese being staptd,
peacocks proud it cain, hens prostitutes in French, chick enscoisandly, docks danttngs
in Fnglish—het lrisg tomcats in French and German.
Finatty. animats more remote from our tires may be mane objecttsely described:
tigers. motecs, b yenas, tines, elephants, beans, nhinos—at east none ate stupid, but
alt hse speetat connotations: a tine is brace in Fneneh, the centre ot attraction in
German and English; a tiger tienee in Eegtish and Geenian, but mane sty and cunning
in French, an elephant is etumsy, insensitise and nesen forgets in any Western
Eunirpeantarguage. attduetohtsnppeanarceandperhoPstenfthoto’ord. nottofact’
in Russian, he has soconnorations.

(2) The translator may replace the image ir the SL scith a stardard TL image ishtch
does not clash such the TL culture, but mhich, like most stock metaphors, proseebs.
etc., are presumabt coined by one person and diffused through poputar speech.
writing and later the media. Obsinus enamptes for one-mend metaphors are: ‘tabte’,
Tafol, tableau; ‘pitlan’, Stiitoe, noutien; ‘teg’,pied. Esamptes of comples metaphors are
‘other fish to fry’, d’autr’rn chau d fouettrr’ (no German equisatent(; ‘when in Rome,
do as the Romans do’, or ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’; man mujl mieden Wolfer
bruton, tlfaut hurter’ acec leo loupo; ‘jump into the finn’s mouth’. ne ,fourr’et’ darn In
gueulr du foup. A good translator is bound to new these and a thousand more such
complex metaphors (there is less wrong wtth one-word metaphors) with scepticism;
they are usu ally so ‘mothy’ (mange auo mitrn(, so cliehitied, often so archaic, the
idoms and proserbs which foreigners learn by the thousand and our more often than
the satires, which apparently only the Russians lake a personal pride in. Sometimes
they are pithy; more often, the image is as noneolistie (broth, iron, etc.) as the
metaphor is archaic—only to German (e.g. urner’ Dark nod Fach( are they held
together by rhymes mere often than in other languages. Three is ellen a ease foe
‘concreting such metaphors to sense in the translation, whether they exist in the TL or
not, simply because they are so stereo typed.

Before I trace this translation procedore, I sate the special intealingual desice which
all speech communities hose foe ‘prntrcttng’ speakers and list cores 1mm taboos, i.e.
euphemism. Taboos commonly relate to anythtng that is sacred or prohibited, teem
the deity and the sanctuary, to birth. sex, decay and death, and in particular to smells
and tastes eetoting to uncleanness Euphemtsms are issaniably metaphors and the
imagesoften hase to be replaced by a cultural equisalent, unlessthe teanslatneis
trying to intense the reader rather than affect him in a way similar to the SL reader.
Where sex is erfereed to in Biblical Hebrew as to ‘know’ or ‘touch a woman’ on to
‘come together’, three are innumerable eqaisalents in modern languages, of which
‘making lose’ or ‘tore’ is perhaps the most obsioas enphcmtsm.

f3f Tra,mlalia, of melaphar by simile, retaining the image This is the obs.ioas may of
modifying the shock of a metaphor, particularly if the TL lest is not emnttse in
character. Per or, a simile ts mu cc eesteaised and ‘setestigic’ than a metaphor. This
procedoer can be axed to modify any type of word, as well as original complex
metaphors:
90 Appraaahes to translation

‘La fence e Dorabella’ (Cool fan tulle).

‘Dorabef Ia is like the Phoenix of Arabia’ (but see beloac).
‘Ccx zones crypluaires alt s’élabore to beautlt’ (Barthes).
‘The ceypt-like areas ashore beauty in manufactured.
‘La brosse do peintre tartine Ic carps humain sue d’énotmexxxtfacet’ (Claudel).
‘The painter’s brush spneads the haman body oxen vast surfaces, like hotter over
bnead.’
‘Banquiers irrespansables et oeffvees-escrocs.’
‘Ir esponsible bankers behaving like swindling gold-manufacturers.’ (NB. Or’fecr’e is axed literal y as well as metaphorically.)
‘II yoa ate an olficer.’
‘SI coax aveo les qualités dun olficien.’

(4) Translation nf metaphor (or simile) by simile plus sense (or occasionally
metaphor plus sense). Whilst this ix always a compromise procedure, it has the
advantage of combining communicative and semantic translation in addressing itself
bath to the layman and lbe enpert if there is a risk that the simple transfer of the
metaphor will not be understood by most nradens. (Paradasicully, only the informed
reader has a chance of experiencing equivalent-effect through a semantic translation,
i.e. transfer at image, whilst the lay reader is simply given the nense of the image.)
Thus tout us vocabalaire moliltreaque (Barthrs) can be translated an ‘a whole
repertoire at medical quackery such as Moliere might have used’. Thus the French
phrase becomes quite clear without the reference to Moliere.
However, the main emphasis here is an the ‘gloss’ rather than the equivalent-effect. It
would be possible to reverse the emphasis, say by translating Die Kluooiker deo
Mat’xirmus—Lesinismaa an ‘the classical writers of Marxism—Leninism, Macu, Engeln
and Lenin, the precursors of socialist society’, etc., where mare emphasis is given to
equisateot-effect, to the eqaufty koowledgable second reader, and the layman is
looked offer only secondarily.

‘La fenice è Dorabella’: ‘Dorabetla is a model of faith, like the Phoenix of Arabia’
(though this will not do for the libretto). A simpler example, used for clarilication
only, might be, C’ cot us renard, ‘He is ax sharp and cunning ax alas’. Nate also that
mme metaphors are incomplete without the addition of a sense component, Coot on
boruf pour’ Ic tr’acail, ‘Hr’s a glutton for mark’; ‘dilly dully’, floitri’ dasa l’ixdéclaion.
Alt the aboxe procedures have the advantages of futhtling Mazart’r classical formula
for the piano concerto, pleasing both the connoisseun and the less lrarnrd.*
(5) ConversIon of melaphor to sense. Depending on the type of text, this procedure is
common, aod is to be preferred to any replacement alas SL by a TL image which is
lao xside of the muse or the register (including herr current frequency, us welt us the
degrees of formality, emoriveness and generality, etc.). to poetry translation,
compensation in a nearby part of the text may be attempted (though I am rather
doubtful about the artificiality of this frequently recommended procedure); but to
state shut in poetry, any metaphor must always be replaced by another is an invitation
to inaccuracy and can ooty be valid far original metaphors (of which mare later).
 The txaexlotion of metaphor 91

In peineiplc. tshen a tnctaphoe is contested to seose the sense most be analysed componential e. stnce the essence of an image is that its pluetdsmenstonal—otheesstse
lbeiteral seduced
anguage esould hosisethe
been astsanslation
ed. Fuethee, the sensise ofianstesse
image wtlI ussofia
ually hate0an emotthet elteehness
as melt asa factual cofomponent . an element of exaggeration which wil
the nsetaphoe. Thas to
teanslate ‘She teas good as gold by ‘Sic ist sehe arttg’ would only be appropriate tt the
Englcet’dtcnon
ish weccoetetoallate
y ‘theow-both
away’ stsoatement‘ceummy’
. Otherwise, the component s of peemanence. salue and eeltabilt y should be beought out. Gagnet’ non pain, sets Bi’ot
that ‘earn one’s living’ is the only senstble teanslatton.
On the othee hand, ‘hoe ceummy’ eequiees contextual as melt as componential
analysis. Foe a pes’oon, the malee components ass probably ‘unpleasantness’, ‘decay’,
‘incapacity’, ‘small-mindedness’, ‘being behind the timex’, and the translator would
hate to cheese from these, is well as some miner components.

(b) Deletion. It the metaphor is redundant or otiose, there is a case for un deletion,
together with its sense component, presided the SL test ix not authoritatix’e or
‘expressise’ (that is, primarily an expression of the writer’s personality). A decision of
this nature can be made only after the translator has weighed up what hr thinkx mere
important and what less important in the text in relation to itx intention. Such criteria
can onlybe net up specificallyforeach test on an informal basin; to set up a hierarchy
of values to be maintained in each translation and to determine a hierarchy of
equivalence requirements, all based on a tent-analyxis scheme, as has been proposed
by Coxrriu (1978), Harris (1975) and House (1977a) is in my opinion fruitless. (For
the name reason most componcntial.analyxis schemes do not serve the translator—but
cotnponentiul analysis does.) A deletion of metaphor can be justified empirically only
on the ground that the metaphor’s function ix being fulfilled elsewhere in the test.

(7) Same melaphor combined sninh sense. Occasionally, the teanslaton who transfers
an image may wish to ensure that it will hr understood by adding a gloss. Beckman
and Callow (1974) quote James iii: ‘The tongue is a fire’ and suggest that the
translator may add ‘A fire sums things; what we say also sums things’. This suggests a
Inch of confidence in the metaphor’s power and clurity, but isis insteuctise, and may
hr useful if the metaphor is repeated, when the fire image can be retained without
further explanation. (Compare translation labels in inserted commas, where the
inverted commas are later dropped.)

I sow propose to discuss the translation of recent metaphors, usually scologisms,

which may be fashionable in the SL community; a few examples: canoes Ia bax’aque,
dana Ic cent, ‘the name 0f the game’, ‘head-hunters’, building diocese (F), Eixiagsflange,
‘tug-of-love’, ‘walk en’, ‘low-risc’, ‘juggernaut’, Ruek.seau, ‘bunching’, ‘flak’,
‘stick’. These ‘metaphorical’ neologisms include genre at technical terms—juggernauts’,
mattodontes, monott’ee—where, if there is no accepted equivalent, the
translator has either to describe the object or to attempt a translation label in inverted
commas—thus the French (sic) expression building diocese could be ‘translated’ as
‘hsgh-nse building mania’. Again, a complex metaphor such ax coiner Ia baraque.
92 Approaches to

meani ng both to ‘try to dettroy the establithed oeder by ctolence’ (oe ‘destroy the system’) or’ to ‘score a tmashing sictory’ can be treated like a t ock metaphar, either
by reptacement of imafe a reductioo to sense, or a combtnattoo of tense aod
metaphor. Rüekosau and ‘bunchIog’ or ‘taitback’ mote or lets translate each other. ‘A
tug-of-tote’ woutd almost certainly ha-ce to be oxplatned to aoy laoguage—lutte
acharnée mIre leoparestn pour acoir Ia farde dun enfanttt appears to Ire cotn
cidencr that such a phrase has been found, but tince the ref erence ts likely to become
mote common, it it likely to be imitated in other languages. (t need hardly add that
‘gab’ in its nest’ English sense canoot be shot back at the Germans.) Lastly, a
metaphorical neologism peculiar to the SL culture may be transferred, whilst an
intrenutional technical term (‘snake’, ocr-pent, Schlaogr) ts always translated, though
pretrrably by an authortoed translater connected to an appeoprtate tnternattonul
organioution (cI. Ia here certe, ‘the green pound’).
Lastly, and this is perhaps the name 0g the gamr—t constdee how ortgtnal metaphors,
ancient or modern, are translated into the modernTL toe the tirst ttme. Here one may
say that thr morr the metaphor dexiates from the SL linguistic norm, the stronger the
casr foe a semantic translution, since the TL neudne ix us likely to be as paroled,
shocked, etc., by the metaphor as mat the original reader. Set’eral factors may
ingurner the teanstator: the importance of the metaphor within the context, the
cutturat taetor in the metaphor, the extent of the reader’s commitment, the reader’s
knswtedge. Thus a passage such at ‘A coil of cord, a colleen coy, a blush on a bush
turned best men’s laughter into wailful mother’ (Joyce), it it is a metaphor at all, is
univeesat rather than cuttural (or rrtatit’itt) in its imagery, and the translator’s
peobtem (which I shy at) is to erconeite the meaning with the ullitceasion bmw, rather
than to being out the teishness of ‘coltren’. No cultural adaptation would normally be
required, although if ‘cords’ and/or ‘bathes’ were not considered to be within the TL
reader’s enpeence or intetlectuat grasp, and the emotionat impact of the passage on
him were important, the translator might replace them with a more generic word such
as ‘bond’ or ‘natural growth’.

If the metaphor were predominantly cultural, I do not think the problem is insoluble
as Dagut (1976) suggests in his brilliant article. Because a sentence from a Hebrew
navel translates literally as, ‘Bound like tsaac foe lbe sacrifice by my love and to make
it known’, which is the English translation reads as, ‘Bound by myloxe and helplessly
to make it knows’, Dagut assumes that the metaphor is ‘virtually untranslatable’, and
that ‘helplessly’ is a poor substitute for the metaphor; but intact both the metaphor
and a part of the tense could be inteoduced us ‘Bound like Isaac foe the sacrifice, and
ready to suffer foe my love in the eyes of all’, which appears In eon-cry more of the
meaning ot ne ekad’. In this case, both Dagut and his translator, moreover, assume
that the English reader has a greater ignorance of Old Testament culture than one
might readily expect.

Further, when I enumine passages 0g the French translation 5g Ulysses, I note that
sheer are few original metaphors that are not semantically translated, though there is
much under- or over-translation: thus, ‘their heads thick-plotting’, leur’oet’dneo
bourréo de combines; ‘goggles of geese’, jabotements de jars; ‘dishonours of their
flesh’, odgmateo deteurt’ace; ‘give a back-kick’, donner’ us coup de pied en rrafsre; ‘the
 The translation of metaphor 93

son flung spangles, dancing coins’, le soleil semain des paillettes, monnaseo dansantes.
Note that whilst the images are kept, some woeds ace turned to, or toned down to, thetr

tanymboliorcatmigeainnigal,e.met‘gosh’aasphorrce,‘hac,k-unli ’asikcoeupdtehiatdenalts-aaI ’est.Thousckmys-metionsthaawphorhilstKon,pfshoule (1967),cdrit norzedbymDagalut,leysagbeenaltseinansgerugestngthraed,eboldandagaierandleon thenmDaguttaphor,themmoreaybeatnasilytseanfsalteuld,bteincauoserseh stigonookirigthensgtymbhotiefc natoctftahnyatoeiganongiualmetaphor,ninalprmcipleelhaisphonirght,becausseltihkielmagye0

to has-n genre local cultural associations than an idiom, and thenelone coo be tnansfnrred
more easily. Whether it is justified to translate ‘dishonours ogtheirflesh’ asstignsateo de
leussacerathoc than déohonneuso deleuschai,’, I cannot say, though I doubt it; it is only
justified ig the translator thinks the English s’rrsion has an oserriding aesthetic satan
which is missing in the literal sersion, and I do not think it has.
Howoser, originalmntaphonspensentfurthnrdilticultinsinlhatthnbestonesoftenhas’e
not only comples bat double meanings, e.g. ‘Death stunned its gunctions’ (O’Casey):
here French has énous’dit, and German betdubte, which translate both senses (shock,
stop), but in other cases, the teanslator has the problem of polysemy on word-ploy and
either chooses one of the senses or reproduces both and loses the word-play.
Nose that unisersal metaphons maybe based not only on the pants and processes of the
human body and the main featuresognaturn andthn weather, bat also on the lactsofses,
so that, howeversteange, an imagelike the followinghas lobe nepeoduced somehow in
any language, since it is not cultural:
‘Quel dma, quel moissonneur de l’ftrrnal die
Avail, en s’allant, ndgligemmnnt jnid
Cetir gaucille doe dans In champ des etoilos.’
[V. Hugo, Booz endos’mi.J
‘What God, what bars-ester of the elnenal summer
Had, as he left, negligently cast
This golden sickle into the gield of stars.’
Hrrnagatn,hownvnr,whilstthemainsesualmmageeemains, adjustmrntsmayhas’etobe
made. Frendhimself,wntingtoAndreflenton,weotnthatthesnuualsymbolsogdreams
could not be interpreted until the circumstances 0g the dream were known.
As well as lbe unisersal and the cultural, there is the personal or idiolectal element in
ongsnal metaphor, the irrational element peculiar to the imagination which the
suernalists cherished, which can only be interpreted within a much wider steucturn of
images. Again, thishas lobe tnauslatndbyprimarymnaningssmncn thernanenorational
points of reference:

‘Un brasier ddjh donnait prise

En son scm a on ravissant roman de cape
El d’épen.’
[Breton—sne Hugnet, 1934.]
‘A charcoal pan had already offered a hold
In its womb to an entrancing
Cloak and dagger story.’
94 Approashes to trarslatinr

The translator follows the metaphors almost as blindly as though they more deliberately
mixed. (Carelessly mised metaphors, however, he decently normalizes if he
has the chance.)

I now consider the translation of original metaphors in newspapers, periodicals and textbooks. Many of these are ephemeral and can be ignored, but some areas, such as
jazz and pop sport, finance, computer technology, advertising, slang (written in
novels and autobiogeaphy(, thieves’ cast (here metaphor shades into code), the
‘underworld’ plus all pricute languages (e.g. the notorious Ameetcan Citizens’ Band
Radio—the CB Bears(, the work of some outstanding journalists, since metaphor is
the main feature ol imaginative writing, are notable for their abundance of recent and
original metaphors. From the translator’s point of view, the easiest of these fields to
handle appears to be pop and jazz: a glance at The Jazz Scene (1961) by Francis
Newton, alias Eric Hobsbawm (see appendix on Jazz language), suggests that many
relutis’ely recent metaphorical terms such as ‘groox’y’, ‘swing’, ‘rock’, ‘punk’, ‘gunk’,
‘soul’ are likely to be transferred as they are into most foreign languages. Stock and
original metaphors are prominent in many West European financial columns, and
basically serve the purpose of jiggreing op a series of passionless statistics, or ruthless
mergers; ‘Rey foote den Veewaltungsrat aus ond ubernahm selbst dat Zepter’, ‘Rry
got rid of the Board and took acer the reins, the roost, the head, the controls’.
Metaphors creeping into foreign medical texts are usually removed in English or
German, but similes should be retained, e.g. ‘La pose rationnelle de l’indication, Ic
respect den contee-indications, a surveillance cliniqur et biologique stricte do
teaitement, voilfi Ic triptyque de Ia therapeutique anticoagutante a laquetle it faut
eeconnaitre teas sen bienfaits’, ‘Anticoagulant treatment has many benefits, provided
(a) iris administered carefully as indicated, (b) contra-indications are observed, (c) it
is strictly monitored both clinically and through laboratory tests’. Sporting metaphors
strive foe the vigour of their objects: ‘The puce-bowler fouud no lilt or seam
movement’ (cricket); ‘Bubbly Brighton go up at last, as champagne corks detonate—
last-gasp goats’. A glance at English football reports (which I do not normally read)
suggests to me that hardly a sentence gets written without a stock (‘cliff-hanger’) or
original metaphor. Whether these metaphors should be reproduced semantically (by
equivalent metaphor or sense) depends on whether they are written foe accurate
description (the true purpose 0g metaphor) or merely foe effect, foe ornament, for
sensation, its stain media-use (KAFKA IN IRAN), in which lattcr ease the translator
may prefer compensation to translation, that is, producing his metaphors elsewhere
where he thinks they will have maximum effect. Foethe five senses, visual, descriptive
words dominate the vocabulary and are mainly transferred to characterize touch,
sound, smelt and taste.

However, in serious non-literary texts, original or recent metaphors must be treated

with the same respect as those in serious literature.

As yes, there is no methodology of the translation of slang. Nunheeg (1978) has

pointed oat that ‘the vast majority of slang and colloquial woeds are either metaphoei
 The tcaeslatinr nf netnphnr 95

cat,oehatsome arkedphonaesthicorfmalpecuiartes’:hinstace‘gras’,‘pot ea’‘wed’,‘ope’,‘hrb’,‘o (sund-efct)and‘Maeyzin’(atrnslatio)lfor‘manij a’(infctalhesacmetonyms);farthe, atwhEteswordshateoughlytesamref nt,heirat elsthread ortisnerquitalo bathe rthecondti sundewhtc eus themandthepriod,stncrlagis
but sometjmet recarrettt. Further, he suggests that slang itselt isa
pecaliaely British/American English teem in relation to which ai’got and gei’go ate
pejfororatsos).
ive. There isLastly,
a great sanelyslang
of age, periowords
d and social clhate
ass in slatong, inhate
stanced bytheie
‘basted’, ‘tmeaning
apped oat’, ‘in the tand
ed’. ‘broko’connotations
, ‘strong’, ‘skint’ (also possirebly marked
evaluated and resalued every 6 months.

Si nce slanf is so sensitive to time and local cultare, the translation problems hardly lend ihemselses to geneealioation. In non-literacy tests on slang, the words wil
normally be transceibed and glossed according to the readership. In fiction and
joaenalism which inclade slang, whenesee the TL has so equoalent woods, the
translator has a choice between iransceiption, which gives hit section a certain local
celoae, and liteeal translation, which, if there is cultural overlap, makes the metaphor
comprehensible. ‘Code-words’, such as ‘acid’, ‘Ireaked oat’, ‘high’, ‘speed’, ‘ancool’,
etc., all metonyms, shoald I think be translated and pat in italics as a warning to the
reader that they are recent neologisms in the SL and can only ho understood in
contest (some pointers may have to be given) in the TL.

The italics isolate the slang word feom ‘normal’ speech. The translation has to take
account ot the moephology ot the TL it the case ol ‘transparent’ neologisms. (That
for ‘freaked out’, oei’hciuoigi, ft’aoque, fi’edaine might give the TL readen a better idea
of thr imaginative world of hippy slang than u mere transcription.) This ‘translate in
italics’ method can only be used for tests studded with slang where the contest of the
italicized word points to its sense and where the TL cultunal equivalents do not esist.
tn isolated cases, slang is translated on the same lines as metaphor, bearing in mind
that escept for commos events, slang equivalents ace rare, and the teanslatoe may
hose to pat in the slang where he can

I base shown that one may regard metaphor as an attempt tocet’nei’, delimit, deline
an object or process, physical or mental, mote closely; us a decoration to show
resemblances (row a rare poetic process) (Empson’s ‘mutual metaphor’); as an
attempt to produce emotive effect, sometimes the sehicle of the salesman and the
media, or general interest; and, as Richards (1965, 1968) does, as the constitutive
banicelement in language, wheee it later becomes dead or literal language. Ihave,
aher listing sesen procedures toe translating metaphors, tried to show why translation
theory is inevitably mainly concerned with the only serious purpose of metaphor or
metonym, and that whilst the translator cannot translate neologistic metonyms
without coining a noologism himsolf, which he would have to acknowledge with
inverted commai and a tootnote, he has to assess the status of the metaphor before he
translates. What I base not demonstrated, but hope to have indicated, is that
96 Appeotohes to

toofaphoo to at the oootre of ott p’oblemo of toanofofton thooty, oot000too ood

hogooftos, ond, foltoootng Dagot, I hope hot liogoisto todi toot it toot teioiolly hoe
theyhooeoptooooo,beoeiogrntotodthottto’illootleodooolftologtooloototiooood
io eothoe tetoote foote Chootoky’o tooeld of hegootto oooeptobdoy. Both Wondeoooko
(t97f) ood Fioth (t9hf) hooo stated that o soood ttoeolatioo thooto to tho hoots ot a
sooodthooeyoftoogoagooodphitooopfsy Aolseoo,oeo-oootooooootototophot
oeoot peooede o sets oedoestoodtog of teoostotioo, tiogoishos aed phttosophy “to
see a ssoetd to o ototo of toed’ (Assooe-seo of fooooeeoo, Wiftsato Blakef.
8. The translation process and synonymy

Itone
n the earlythat
days oflinguistics
translation theory. whenbegan
Fremdipratochenconcern
began appearingitself
(1956) andwith
Eugenetrunvtatton—it
Nida wrote Too’ardo the Sciencwas
e of Tr’asometimes
solating (1964)—this washoped
the t rst
to ecoti’e a single theoey, a semiotic, if not a lingutstic theory, that woald encompass
dl translottng that would penhaps also pnoduce a stogIe scientihc method applicable to
all translation human and machine. A few years later, Catfoed wrote hts A Lingutotic
Theory of Tr’antlaiion, and sttmalattng as it was. it only cos’ered a small part of
reanslatton difficulties, and its multiple ‘shift’ procednees were rather simple and
mechanical. Since then Nida and KulIce hace recommended dynamic equa’alence as
the only true merhod of translating; in fact Nida says that translation iv entirely
communication whtlt Neubert and Kade hose distinguished the ina.ariart fcognitiael
and she cariant (pragmaric) element in translating, Juger (1979) has produced a
lheorrtical book, and almost es’eryone has produced ingenious and useless diagrams
of she translation process.

Remarkably, in rhr bar 2 yrars mr base also had Iwo new closely resembling theories
of rrarslation. Harris (1975) has propounded his ‘narural translation’, meaning ‘any
translation done in e’ieryday eircnmstances by bilingual people who have no special
raining for it. Three-year-aIds translate sporrareoasly in rhr presence of listeners
who they do nor think speak borhlanguages, and furor develop a criterion of “correct”
lranstatior—a translation camprrerce in the Chomsky spirit.’ (Personally I regard
translarion as a compbes, artificial and annatoral process, requiring an eserplional
dogreeaf inrefIignre.)

In a later paper (1977) Harris and Sherwood argue that Ike ‘data for transbatobogy (the
seirnlifie study of translating) should come primarily from natural translation rather
than from literary, technical and other professional or semiprofessional branches of
translation as in the past’. Harris and Sherwood compare ‘transbatobogy’ with
linguistics, but, like Seleskositch, apparently thrnk the two disciplines unrelated.

Harris and Sherwood’s arguments are mainly concerned with proving (ursuecesslally
I Ihink) that translation is an innate skill in bilinguals. They take about twenty case
hinlonies relating to bilinguals (children and adults) in an Interpreting, not a translating
sitoalron. Various rsumplrs of good and bad translation are produced (interference,
undeeleanslalion), and there appears nothing ‘innate’ about bilingual translating skill
by defrnirion, a bilingual car interpret to some degree of competence, and that in all.
More relevantly, the authors prod ocr no evidence that their data are going robe of the
slightest assistance to a translator laced with a technological, instilurional or lirrrary
lent—Ike only valid criterion if nalural Iranslating is to be included in translation
henry. In fact, ‘Iranslalobogy’ gets forgotten in the course of the paper. The paper is
97
98 Apptoachrs to translation

of goeofeo i010resl to fho psychologist rhon to rho ttanslatioo theorist, aod has an
iolenesirng passoge 00 the ‘pleasute that tronsLating nay give to a (yoong) translator
ssadden
chich is an undeescoreha
101emont. The meotrelief,
ol toot are ofihe
translatio‘I’ve
n, Ihe longgel
obses iothe
n with wendstranslalor’s
and facts, the moor, lbeontsmirk’
inaally jostleare
d kaleidosallcope, facels
the chess-game.ofIhe
pssrnlrncrs;
ychological proceeoo-srrbal
s . Fanther, the brilnet
ianl Sellingaistic
oskosrtch (1976, meanings;
1977) has esplained herawareness
irierpretatree iheerofy of tpurpose,
ranslation which is001based enofsclanguage.
ose, not moods oe
consciousness and longaage rePoses, nor dedaclions from cenlnastise lungauslucs;
Srlenkoviich admils that neuter translation goes beyond untenprelaloon, but she does
001 discuss she dislinction between spoken and wnslten langaage. Farther, Ihough she
gives some beilliani examples of inlenperialive teanslalion: e.g.
‘Today most people don’t have enough self-discipline
‘Les gens se laissent complblemenl oiler aaioard’hau.’
espect my childeen to hare a anis’eesily edacatuon.’
‘81 50 de soi qar mes enfanis feroni des éiades.’
‘I appnove of sepanale social loses ion hasbands and wises.’
‘11 esl nonmal qur maci ci frmmr sorteni séparement.’

she fails to point oat that all three Inanslalians show not only loss but serious
distortion of meaning, and if these utterances were artistically or politically or
scientifically important, her Iheory would be a dangeroas one 10 base a method on.
Whilst both Harris and Seleskovitch show clearly enough thai a linguistic theory of
translation is inevitably inadeqaaoe anless it takes silaational conlesi, addressen and
addressee into accoant, lhein own almost identical Ihennies nest almost rnlierly on
intuition and reflexes, and allows foe perhaps far too wide a choice of translations for
each atteraser, since only the ‘sense’, not the words, are impoe100t. Moreosen. they
fail to take accoant of many bilingaals’ notorious incapacily or awkwardness in
translating from one to the other of their langaages, (or differences in how the
languages mere learned), probably dae to the fact that they take too mach of the sense
fnrgeauted,oatofcoarsrsytotheirlistenees. Seleskot’itch’stheoryhasmanys’aluable
elements inclading reen the obt’ioas fact that in many cases, parlicalarly for ran of ihe
mill utterances where what I have called ‘semantic translation’ (roughly, where every
wand is ‘sacred’) ix non required, there is qaitr a wide choice of usually eqoally and
indistingaishubly imperfect bat adequate translations, and no perfect translation.

However, the basis of Seteskovitch’s theory is unsound. Translation and interprelatins

base to be based on words, sentences, lingaistic meaning, langaage—brcaaso
apart tram the interpreter’s paealangaage and body langaage (not always clear in
both), they have no other material foandations. Meaning does not exist withoat
words. Meaning arises from sights (signs, movements, coloars, shapes. etc.), sounds,
smells, lastes, sarfaces (bach, feel, testate), us well as drives, feelings, ideas,
memnrtes, images, etc., that reach consciousness; bat all oh ese can only be mediated
by wordn, assinord sporadically by mental images. Ceetainly, herr are periods when
both rho tranulatoe and intnrprrtrr have to supprrss their memory of the SL words,
etc—the translator at least when he is reading through his version for the last lime
(and sevrral times belorr his prnultimatr dour comparison between original and
 The translation process and syeoeytey 99

translation), the interpreter, according to Seleskovitch’s pupils, when he srtets

interpreting. Moreos’rr, as a training against ‘literaltsm’, to. the uncomprehending,
515j5 onetooflr reflderjflgs served up by so many students, tch on mn asmuch
as in commanicatis’e translation (in a semanttc translatton, ‘fatal ts as
likely to he ‘awkward’ in German and ‘inevitable’ tn French as Its to be ‘fatal’), the
method is sound. Further, ig intelligently applied, st will show that whilst it ts easy
enough to provr that a million translations are badhrcaosr they cootaso plato errors, it
is not so easy to make an objective choice between transtattoos that esther stress the
‘force’ or the ‘meaning’ of the utterance. Lastly, the method stresses the importance ol
toversimplifies.
he point, the intention, the toneItoftends
any utterance,towitput
hout whtanch noidiomatic,
translation can be efrather
gective, hot iglib,
n my opinstick
ioostignoreand
stoo muchsubssdsar
conventtonal
y meansog, toomuchdetatl. It
at a premiom. Thus, in another of Seleskovitch’s examples: ‘Capable married mothers
should base carree opportunities’, ‘Il taut que let femmes qus ont den onfants pusssent,
riles aussi, esercerun métier’, the important idea conveyed in ‘capable’ (presumably
that women who run their homes capably should have career opportunttseu—although
Seleskositch appears to ignorr this sense—possibly, all married women capable ol
pursuing acareershouldhasrtheopportunityofdoingso)ismissed.Notethat
although Seleskositch claims to ignore the words of the original, she cannot ignore any
of its key-words. Further, although her lecture is entitled ‘Why interpreting is not
tantamount to translating languages’, and it is stated that ‘translators goose step
further than interpreters and try to adjust the expression of sense to the linguistic
meaning of the original language’, Srleskovitch proposes a theory that ‘covers both
iulrrprrtationasdwt’ittes translation of cossempot’ary texts’—whyonly ‘contemporary’
srnts?—and is in fact a takr-over bid to include both translation and interpretation.
There would be soother reason for her approving reterence to Freud’s interpretative
translationofJohn Stuart Mill. (Freud read the original passage bypassage, closingthe
book before translating each passagr—but Seleskositch forgets Freud’s notorious
photographic memory.)
Seleskositch concedes that the ‘aesthetic value of belleo-leto’eo raises particular
problemsofform whichhavr lobe takrointoaccountpet’oe’ andtherrfore presumably
have nothing to do with her theory. (A theory of translation that does not account for
the translation of the greatest literature is Hamlet without the Prince.) Further, she
makestheexteaoedinarystaermentthattheoriesoftrasslieion basrd onlauguage claim
that languages cannot be translated because of their derprooted differences (to my
knowledge, no modrrn translation theorist believes in lb e strong sees ion of the
Humholdt—Whorf—Sapir thesis, and in particular the Leipzig School rejects it completely).
Is is difficult to understand Seleskovitch’s final thesis: ‘translation of language
and renderingof sense are not lobe confused; neither are linguistics and the science of
translation’, nor her peculiar distinction between ‘sense’ and ‘mraning’. I can only
maintain that translation is coserened with words, that it is only partially a science (in
any event, there is nothing scientific about the Paris School’s ‘interpretative theory’),
and that in as far as it is a science, it can only be based on linguistics.
Seleskos’itch’s theory is amplified (with abundant stimulutingesumples) byherselt and
her collaborators in the valuable December 1976 issue (no. 24) of Etudes ale
Lisgut,eeique appliquee (Didier).
100 Approaches to

The theoricing has all bees too general attd too simplified. Trattslatton a a sktll and as
arhast as mcnotli as a sthecict c .same
Dynamic equiinformation
valence is not poss asble s the
hen theoriginal’s
ortginal s rt er is wrreader.
it ng to pleaseThe
himself rinvariant
ather than any readermaterial
, at when theelement
translation’s readerin
a testis certainly translatable, hot as languages look at objects so dtfferestly it maybe

asdifcultoranslteas nyideolgicaltes.Basicly,anygen altheorywilsconeatf esbesplitopintheconflictbewenthesor os‘ntcresi’natrnslation,wher theconflicbetwentheinterst ofthefirstwrie andiheradersofthetansltions trongerthanthabetwenthenormsofthesourceandtarget

langoages, where the translator has to decide whether the culture or the message
ifound
mplicit in theinutterperformativcs,
ance, the (lingoistic) meaningwith
of the communi cative force smote important. A foolproof translation theory, like a foolproof translation, can only be
standardized instructions, standardized patierns, the
‘rehcarted response’: Den Hahn auds’ehen—’turn off the tap!’ ‘No smoksng’—Defcnsc
defumer, Raachen cesboten—ihese, and many mont like thrm, are rho only form of
perfect translation, measured by their success (thrir rHectistress) rathrr than iheir
trnth—im Anfang oar die Taf, nichi duo Wart—and admittedly they are a ltttlc doll.
Ifldismissunyprospectofu generaltfreotyoftranslution,ossthrgroundihalnooalid
theory can hr bails on so many variables, then tam not suggesting that theory has no
place in the study 0f translation. I am suggesling shut we base to remember that ‘our
purpose into be useful’ (to quote Benjamin Britten), lobe useful to translators, and to
assist in raising Ike generally rather low standard of translation, at least in the United
Kingdom. So fur, Professor Butler has said, translation theory has had julIe impact
on translation, although this argument hardly beassesaminatiou. Chapman’s and
Dryden’s Inunslution theory had considerublr influrncr on English literary translation
in the seventeenth and eighteenth crnturies (Steiner, S975) and the idea that after 21
years of Fremdnptaches, theory has had no influence on translation practice in the
GDR must be absurd. Further, Nidu has many disciples and missionaries who
acknowledge the sttrnglh of his ideas in many Bible translations. It is, however, true
that theory has had little influence on modern English literary translation, where most
marks have snfferrd from lack ala revisri to correct gross errors, not style (usually
they are translated by one person on a husband and wife seam that appears equally
subjective), rather than luck of theory; that Wnightmun (1967) who has written
superbly on translation theory (he in also the translator 0f Levi-Strauss) no longer
believes in it, and shut the majority of English translators, traditionally English, i.e.
pragmatic, to a man, are either contemptuous afar hostile In translatinn theory.
When Seleskovitch points out that translation has rushing to do with the type of
sent ence used by linguists to exemplify semantic cuntnnls such as ‘John plays golf or
‘My dog has wings’, we would all agree; but when she says that ‘Carefully defined
semantic equivalents are rarely of any use when conveying information in another
language’ she is surely mistaken, since this peacess, which I have culled cognitive
translation, and Brislin (1976) ‘decenlring’ and is sometimes referred to as the
intermediate language (it is ‘similar’ in any language) is oftrn the basis, the raw
masrriulfromwhich one inches towards udnurnttrunstution,sstsetheritiscammunioalive
or semantic. I am suggesting that Seleskovitch’s attempt to solve the problem
(and it isa big problem) by ignoring the words, by disregarding cnntrastive linguistics,
 The traeslatios process ned synonymy 101

by using spontaneous translation as a model in favoae of total communication, chile it

may act as a corrective to some of the neat conversions of say Tesnièro, Malblasc,
Vinay and Darbelnet, Friedrich, etc., incites inaccuracy.
However, I propose now to take anothee insufficiently discussed and more modest
peoblem, that of synonymy. It is ofton said that translation isa foem of synonymy, and
mill befie by rrbottinf this, takisf as my example the English sentence:
‘My feiend has gone to the theater.’
Tb eclosest synonymous veesios I can think of here is:
‘My mate has left and ix now in the playhouse.’
(Mate is thenvorkiof-classeqaivalent of’feiend’ and ‘playhouse’ is clear (Schauspielhaas)
but sevcrusod ness, except as the same of a theatre.) Now, if you look at the
German: ‘Meie Freuud itt ins Theatergegangen’, you will ice it is an almost perfect
(isomorphic) fit, escept that it does not cover a girl-friend or a female friend (sot the
same thing). Thus the Germ an vees ion is far closer to the Enflish orifisal than the
sysonymoas English version. The esample illustrates the not always recognized fact
that the meaning of any word is explained better and more neatly by translation than
by, say, synonym, paraphrase or even by pointing. More pointedly, it illustrates
(Theater is Theatre, not usually Schauspirlhaun) that translators mast use words (as
welt as all components) of equivalent feequency, and not as they are still told to at
school, at least in England, choose a synonym instead of an English word that looks
the same usa German or a French or Russian weed—three are perhaps as many ‘true
friends’ as there arrfaux amOs.
Further, the point illustrates that the translator’s first job is to translate or to
transcribe; only when this is not possible, for all kinds of reasons of situational and
linguistic context, connotation, etc., must he resort so synonyms, then to componenhal
analysis, then to definition, and finally to his last (bat not infrequent) recoarse to
paraphrase.

Let me now return to another aspect of synonymy, synonyms in grammar, which are
often closer and more numerous than in lexis. Take the Germ an sentence: ‘Es ist
unmoglsch, dan Problem zu lösrn.’ We have the following potential translations:
1. Isis impossible to solve the problem.
2. Solving the problem is impossible.
3. The problem is impossible to solve.
4. One cannot solve the problem.
5. A solution to the problem is impossible.
6. The problem is insoluble.
7. To solve the problem is impossible.
8. Three is no solution to the problem.
9. The problem has no solation.
10. Solving the problem is an impossibility.
Ssncr ‘impossible’ can be replaced by ‘not possible’, ‘insoluble’ by ‘nut soluble’ and
‘one’ by ‘we’ or ‘you’, we now have fifteen possible translations. Farther, in context,
102 Approaches to trarsiatiss

the sentence might become ‘inability to solve the peoblem’, ‘the insoluble peoblem’,
‘being unable’, ‘owing to one inability’ and ‘the peoblem’ could be replaced by ‘this
peoblem’. Nate that the Geeman by back teanslation can do all that the English can, escept use gerunds and paeticiples adroitly, but its use of noun-infinit ves is moee
adeoistcrones
t. With all that,anore woulthed noemalGerman.
ly expect ‘Es tntNote
unmoglich,that
don Problany
em zu Ibreplacements
sen’ to he translated by ‘Otis ibymposslexical
ible to solve thsynonyms
e problem’ since it keeps(e.g.
the tame
‘settle’ toe ‘solve’; ‘question’, ‘point’, ‘argument’ Oar ‘problem’) ace further
from lbe sense than the grammatical synonyms. This then becomes a plea foe more
grammatical desterity and gexibility, and against lesical licence, in

loom discuss an aspect of lexical synonymy. Ullmunn (1957) has stated that complete
(isomorphic) synonyms exist only in technical nomenclature, that some by no
infrequent technical teems are completely interchangeable. As trunslators, we know
that this is incorrect, a priori because ol my principle of equivalent frequency, sod in
fact because all words have different connotations of situalion and/or user’s origin
(education, class, profession, dialect, etc.). Ullmann gives two words foe the
inflammation of the blind gut, ‘caecitis’ sod ‘typhliris’, but caecitis in not even
mentionedin the shorter dictionaeies, two wordsfor sounds made by friction of breath
in narrow opening, ‘fricative’ or ‘spirant’, but ‘spi000t’ is hardly used in British
English, and hans broader meaning than ‘fricative’. And again, I suggest to you that
there mill always be canes where a German writer or translator will be able to give
sound reasons for preferring Laarlehs’e to Phonetik, Spt’aehicinoenoehafl to Linguiotik,
Bedesraxgolehr’e no Sesnasiih or the now pretentious Sema.tiologie. If the translator is
aiming at good style (in communicative teanslation) ar is engaged in semantic
translation, one should normally be able to find objective reasons for preferring one
word to another, but this does not hold good for larger units: whnrr a ‘straight’
translation is not possible, preference between ten or more equally good translated
sentences or paragraphs may be a matter of personal taste.
The richness of English synonymy, deaminf as the language does on there main
sources (Germanic, Romance and Classical) not to mention Norse, a later injection of
Germanic, and hcving now the same powers of mord’formation (notably double,
tripte, quadruple, etc., noun compounds such as ‘output bus driver—device for
amplifying output signals) as German has often been commented on. How does a
translator handle a set such as ‘quick, fast, speedy, rapid, swift, fleet’ or ‘dark, murky,
sombre, gloomy, dismal, dingy, obscure, dim, dusky’? Stytistically, some woeds can
be used for the interstices of the source langaage: thus since ‘murky’ has no German
equisatent, it might be justifiably used to take over parts of dunkel, fin.rrer, erub, or
dueler just as dunkel and finnrer perhaps share the semantic field of ‘dark’. In the
above cases, I doubt whether componential analysis would serve the translator as well
asthe type of coltocational analysis made many yrarsago by the great Albrecht Reum
or more recently byE. Agricola in Wbrtes’ und Wendungen. The meaning of a word
(or of a set of words) into be foand not in its use on single occasions but in a summary
of the accumulation of their various asugrs, and the torm of tabulation favoured by
compnnensiul anatysis—a seer diagram or a plus/minus statement of dimensions for
ssngte words, or a matrix tabte foe a set of words—is likely to be of more use to the
 The translation process and synonymy 103

lexoicogsdening
rapher than to theatrasource
nslatoe e viewinlanguage
g a tangle of woods woed,
in his own (tanhowevee—take
gos) language. Hee he may reqobojlen—he
ie a thesaoeus before mumayktng anwant
intuit ve choinset
ice. Whenup a
componential analysis with iiihsen, wiederguimachen, Gesugiaasg geben, abbuj3en,
Es’naioleisten, tilges, heeeues, efoee selecting the English woed which, ootof context,
will embeace the masiwum number of semantic components.
Howes’ee, his choice will be subject to theee lateeeevsssons: the woed has to be
ee-esamined in its eefoeentiaf, its linguistic and isnally its communicattve context,
wheee itssense may be eedistriboted elsewhere in ohe sentence.
The problems of transtating referential synonyms are soflicienlly well known. They
may housed (a) to avoid repetition, (b) to secure cohesion, (c) because (as above) the
author weites badly, (d) in the interest of redundancy, to expand the test, (e) to
provide, almost incidentally, additional comment about the topic (‘Palostono is a
small coontey—it is the Holy Land’). Referential synonyms ace sometimes difficult to
detect, and the translator is ‘lost’, ifhe fails to do so. Deictics such as ‘that’, ‘the’, ‘it’,
‘which’, ore usually clear enough, but a ‘geserof’ or ‘empty’ serb (‘do, operate’) or
soon (‘arrangement’) or even adjective (‘significant’) may function as referential
synonyms fos morr specific cortesponding elements in ike same on the pnesioos

Philosophers often point out that a communicative act consists of a modality plus a
propositins, and the essence is in the proposition. Thus Stoawsos (1970b( says of
sentences such us

‘Unfortunately, Socrates is dead’

‘Fortunately, Socrates is dead’
that ‘it is tar loom cleur thut their truth conditions diffee’, nod thus that they are
synonyms of a kind. Too trunslator, tar from being synonyms, they ore contradictory
statements, and the modality is more important than the proposition. If I change the
sentence to ‘Fortunately (or Unfortunately) Adolf Hitler is dead’ this becomes
clearer, and the attitudes of the two speakers rather than the peoposition (which may
be true or false) are the two essential facts that contradict each other.
Retursieg to geammoticaf synonymy, note that the translator is usually onlypeemitled
to move towaeds greater naturalness: thus ‘Then he killed the tigee’ cannot be
trassfated by ‘Dunn wurde dee Ti gee von ibm getbtet’—both sentences are rather
artificial in any event—rot only because the focus of interest is changed, hut because
the German sentence is stiffer than the Esgfish and is less probable.
Gthrs pseudosynonymous sentences appras lobe (a) ‘This is solo Picasso!’, (b) ‘This
is not a work of mine!’ said by Picasso discovering a forgery. Cognitivoly, thore is a
this dtstisctios. In (a), Picasso does not say whether he painted the work; in (b), he
does sot soy whether Picasso painted it. The implied difference is that in (a), Picasso
painted the original, whilst in (b) he probably did not. Cosnolalionally, thr first
sentence is arrogant and affected, whilst the second is a straight denial. The translator
whose object is to help the reader would want to bring out any soch distinction
implicit in the original.
104 Apprnaches to trarslatinr

From a translator’s pains of sires’, synonyms in collocatson are of tsar kinds: (1) traditional formslas, (2) emphasis, (3) bad wrstsnf, (4) sntendod so make delscate
distinctions and (5) lists that do not often correspond wsth a TL test.
For standardioed terms, sack as ‘last osill and testament’, ‘nathout let ot htndtance’,
‘in good repair, order and condition’, Ot ‘foods and chattels’, only letetscslhgs’
Vcosfugccng, oboe Hiodsa’ang, in gucem Zuntandsi, Hab and Got n’tll do, being
standardioed in both languages, and afain Objakte cod Gegenntande (there mast be
many more Germ an ones( can only be translated as ‘obtects’.
Synonyms are often collocated to emphasize a potet, whether it ts a colloquial
eopecssion such as ‘frifhtfully, terribly fond’, or even fl an encyclopaedia: ‘I legnams
marciti, ltadici’. In the last esamplr, the three qaalsfsers could
be artificially separated out as ‘decayed, rotted, crumblsng’, showsng a process, oe
more likely the strangest qualifier coald be chosen and suitably resnlorced: ‘The
limber is found to hr completely rotted:
Synonyms are in fact sometimes collocated is such away that it 5 not clear whether
the purpose in emphasis or distinction, or it is mcrnty a badly written phease. Thas
Norman St. John Stesas recently spoke of ‘an education in the arts or the humanities’.
An arts degree (i.e. literature/history, geography) is a drgree in the humanities, hut
hnmanities does not normally include the arts. If the two are lobe distinguished. then
‘arts’ is nchdne Kdtsnta and ‘humanities’ is perhaps humaninlioche Bildusg. Did the
speaker mean ‘both’, or ‘either’? Fortunately the German translator does not need to
know, as odes’, like ‘or’, has both meanirgs. Again, a sentence ouch as ‘he appreciates
and saturn books’ may simply mean ‘cc tchbtet Biicher besonders hock’, but if the
synonyms are lobe differentiated, it may mean ‘er schbtot und legt Wert aul Bucker’
or, as a job, ‘en schätet and bewettet Buchet’.
Note attn that a translator may hr tacrd with a series ot closely related lesical items.
semi-synonyms that represent entities, esents or qualities (these are the lesical stock)
for which there is no our-to-one equisalert in the TL. The translator may have to
replace them with a smaller number of items including, say, a geneesc term to
for two or three of the missing items. Thus, Italian can use suffises to show sarietses of
tier: ‘Trnnchi e rami vrngnno segati in cantieri e ridotti in truss, panche, panconi
tasolini, tasole, travicelli, corernti a morali, correntini o listelli, scorooni.’ Here the
translator has two choices: he can either ignote the list and write down all the
(English) technical terms for the varieties of shapes which tree trunks and beanches
are sawed into in timber yards; or, he can summarize the list as ‘beams, boards and
battens of various sizes’ (to cover the -mi, -di, -oni, etc.), possibly adding, depending
on the interest of the readee, the Italian technical terms, including the alternative
terms which are likely to be missing in English.
9. Translation and the metalingual function of
language

Farpeculiarities.
the paepase af thts chaptThixcapacitycould
er, the nnetalingual* function of l,tbetgitagetttstanced,
is defined as the capacisay,ty of aittlanguage to detceibe or to dlusttate one 0t m0te of its oivn
ae article onpltraxat soebsin
English; in a passage stating that a panticalat ssord 5 ased in a speciat sense, e.g. titeralty, an that it has recently devetoped a special sense; and finally in a passage,
literary en non-literany, deliberately including o’ord-play and any linguistic ambiguWhenapasnagecancernsngagnammaticalpeculiaeityatthesOarce

langaage haste
be translated, one must asname that the second reader eeqaires mate information
than the firut, and therefoeo that ‘eqain’alent—effect’ is nat a eealintic aim; the
atsa han te decide mhether the reader is a specialist xsith name kuossledge
of the SL or mhethrr he is coming ‘cold’ to the passage. Thus terms such as Umlaut
are normally transcribed in German grammars far learners, unfortunately ssithout a
literal translation (‘change of [tassel] sound’ tsith diarrests) ishich mould help the
learner. In a clause sueh as Die Bezeichnung Ablaut, die ion J. Gxmm geptdgs
u’ut’dr, a normal translation mould read: ‘The term Abbot (or sosvel gradation)
mhich man coined by J. Grimm’ if the test nelated to the German language
specifically, but bnth the German teem and its sneentor might be relegated to
footnotes or even omitted if the text mete concerned svith voted gradation generally.
Gn the other hand, an English tent discansing such old phenomena but fairly recent
terms as ‘pheasal serbs’ or ‘subject participle clauses’ mould not normally translate
adequately mithostt (a) a transcription of the term, )b) a loan translation in inserted
to thom its literal meaning, and possibly as a proposal foe neologism, (c) a
definitinn (if not already in SL lest), (d) a SL example, (e) an interlinear translation
ni the example to demonstrate the term’s syntax, )f) a tunctional translation
distinguish ‘functional translation’ as the most effective teanslatton of a term in a
particular context from ‘communicative translation’ as a general method). Thus in
an English grammar for German linguists, the German translation of the sentence:
“Killing my friend gives me no pieasure” ts an example of a subject participle
clause’ might be: “Killing my friend fives me no pieasure” )mortliehe
Ubeesetzung:”ThtendmeinenFt’eundbeneitetmirkeinVergnugen”;funktionale
Ubeeselaung: “WrnnichmeineuFreundumbringe,emptinde sob keinVeegnugen”)ixt
em Beispiel rices Snbjrkt’Partizipsatzes (Ssblect Participle Clause), d.h. Otnet
Gerund- ndee Partieipgruppe, die die StrIle einrs Subjrkt-Gliedxatoes ringenommen
hat.’ Thns the reader can inspect all the relevant facts.

105
106 Approachts tn

Secondly, if a word in the SL is used tn a paeticulat sense, the translator has sesenat
cheitnanslated
ces: ‘Ac 16a siècte desas:cent‘Inaines the
de Fnançaisisteenth
s etaient coapablecentary,
s de hbertmage, Pethnndeeds
e dans te sees sieil iofde “liFrenchmen
cence de l’espnit en mattescene
re de fot”.’ Thegettlty
sentence coulofd be
libossoago, in the ebsolete sense of the Fnench ssoed, meantnf fneethtnktng in
rmast
eligious mathetens.gaided
’ Atternatitelyby, the obese sentence teem ‘guilty of’ could be replaced by ‘Ishertinism’. ‘libeetinage’ on ‘freethinking in rebgsoas matters’. The transtatee
his assessment of the neader’s knoseledge and interest.
Again, a transtaton is entitled to delete a special sense of a teem, fit is of no interest to
the reader, onto repeodace it as a linguistic curtosity. Then: to macshe note ou
pas’allole, comme on to qualifie dofacon euphémique could be ttanslated as esther ‘the
black machot’ or ‘the black market; the French also refers to tt euphemistically as
cocos pas’alldlo (parallel rate) os parallel rate (eoucn par’allèlo)’ the bracketed
translations coald be omitted, depending again on the interest and knowledge of the
reader (cf. médecinopatallelo os hotos’odooo eu empitique: tr.: alternatise medicine).

The translatnr also has a choice when a test gises alteenatis’e terms for the same
referent. Thas: ‘La mobilisation actice ent uric dos baoeofondamenaaleo du tt’aitemenl
dot maladies ootoo-uoticulait’oo. On patIo auooi do kinonithorapio uctico eu do
cinéoithés’apio, ou do gymrsaotiquo thor’apoatiquo: cooont doe oynorsymoo.’

‘l’his cuald hr translated as: ‘Actie’e mobilization is a fandamental element is the

trratmrnt of disrasrs of the bones and joists. Otis somrtimrs referred to as
kinesitherapy or remedial esercises.’ (There is no reason why the translator should
not add othercurrent synonyms.) If the test specifically refers to French practice, the
reader may also be interested in basing the three synonyms transcribed. Again, if the
synonyms in the TL are not as feequently used as those in the SL, the translator is
justified in excluding them.

Translating mord-play in literary and non-literary tests embraces (exceptionally) two

different problems. In non-literary lests, the read er usa ally requires all possible
inlarmatiun. Fur example: ‘Das Ehepuar X lebt auf ziemlich grol3em FalSe. Nach dee
Ansicht dereinensoll dee Mann ciolcordiont and sich dabei etwaozuruckgologthaben,
nach anderen mieder soil sich die Frau otwat zut’uckgologt and dabei ciol t’ot’dsont
haben’ (Freud, Dot’ Witz, p. 26, Fischer Bücherei). This is translated by James
Strachey as: ‘Mr. and Mrs. X lice in fairly grand style. Some people think that the
husband hasearned alot and so has been able to lay by a bit (oich otwaa aus’uckgelogt);
others again think that the wife has lain back a bit (sich otwus zur’tickgologt( and so has
been able to earn a lot’ (Freud, Jokos and thou solution to 560 unconscious, p. 66,
Penguin Books, 1975).

Thus the panning element is retained, bat the German is reproduced as the joke
illustrates the rearrangentent of precisely the sume verbal material—in the English
version there isa slight change. (In other instances, Strachey cannot do this so neatly;
onp.54hehastolranslateudozenwordsinafootnote,wurningthat’Ifallthisis
borne in mind, mhat follows will be intelligible’.)
 Translation and the reetaliegual farettnr nf trgsiaue 107

James Strachev esplairs in his preface why he has rejected presious methods of
dealadopted
ing with esamplbyesA.of worA.d-plBnitt,
ay which cthe
onsistebooks
d of either drfirst
opping ttranstator,
hem altogether or resubstttates
placing them with thethetranstatranstator
tor’s esamples. Thesstnstghts
econd method,
for the aashor’s (Incideotatty. some of Britl’s esamptes were gratefutty qaoted by
if Freud in tater German editions.) Britt reptaces the above take as fottaws: Two witty
statesmen, X md Y, met at a dinner. X, acting as toast master, insrodaeed Y as
fottows: ‘My feicod Y is a wondonful man. Alt you hose to do is to open his mouth, put
in a dinner, and a speech appears, etc.’ Responding to the speaker, Y said: ‘My friend
the toast master told you what a wonderful man I am, that all you hose to do is to
open my mouth, pat in a dinner, and a spreeh appears. Now let me tell you what a
wondes-ful man he is. Alt you base to do is open anybody’s mouth, put in his speech,
and the dinner appears’ (Wit and ito relation to the unconocious, in. A. A. Beill, p. 36,
T. Finches Unmin, 1906). Brilt adds a few comments similar to Freud’s (note that the
sesuat background of Freud’s geradeau diaboli.tch gores- Witz is missing) and then
quotes a joke by Oliver Wendell Holmes, which Freud adds to a later edition without
translating it into German, giving it as on rsampte of the untnanstatahility of jokos
with this technique. (In fact, alt jokes are translatable, but they do not always have the
same impact.)

James Sinochey’s principles of tronslatson ore in the circumstances the only connect
ones, and must be followed in alt cases where the words are as important as the
thought, and ‘dramatic illusion’ (i.e. the translation should crud like the original) lets
important. Straebey’s translation is a model (see also his discussion of Wiec, Scher’z,
Komik, Humor-, etc.); isis, however, significant that his neologism ‘paraprasis’ for
Fehtteiatong has been generatly replaced by ‘Freudian slip’. Whilst in-gnoups and
word-droppers readily acquire neotogisms, an opaque enpression like ‘paraprasis’ is
unlikely to find general acceptance, particularly among linguistic puritans.

The translation of pnovenbs in non-litenary tests is ssnaightforwatd if the TL has a

rreogniaed equivalent. Otherwise, the translator has the option either of translating
theforrignproverbandshowingissreferenee sothetrut,orofabsorbingsheproverb
in she test. Thus in an article on pollution in Italy, where she proverb has no English
equivalent: “Tush i fiomi portano at mare” dice it proverbio r, in an eerto sense, cia
seen. Machr cosa porsono oggi at mare i fiumi? Tulsa to spnrieieo r i veleni ehe gli
anmini geltano eaten di essi, sopraffaeendo it prossido potere aulodepuranse del
qualela naturali aveva dosasi,’ it seems lame the mast satisfactory version follows the
first solution, although isis less dies-es than the original: ‘The Italians have a saying
that all risrrs lead to the sea, by which they also mean that money attracts money.
Now, in the hens sense, this is true. But what kind of wealth are rivers carrying lathe
sea today? Nothing but the filth and the poisons that people throw into rivers,
destroying their natural and beneficial self-purifying power.’ (Alternative: ‘There iv
no doubt that all rivers eventually lead lathe sea but all they carry with them is the
filth and the poisons. .

now base so consider word-play or polysemy in truss where ‘dramatic illusion’ in

esterstat, that in, in translating plays and poems, and desirably other literary works.
108 Appnnuehrn te

Here, most frequently, the teanslaton con nely coptstee eec at the two senses, e.g. for
‘On as sweet-seasoeed shawnee ate to the gnoasd’
(SHAKESPEARE, Sonnet 75.)
‘Wee still gensnirotrr tegee st tots fetd’
(tn. STEFAN GEoRGE.)
te the scpaetee betwoce Polontas and Hamtet (Hamlet Act tit n Pnlonaat I dtd
enact Jalius Caesae: I seas kitled on the Capitot; Beatus kttted me. Hamlet: It ssas a

brute pant of him to kit so capital a colt there), there are sheen pass (brute, pant. capisat), two sets of alt terat ons (krt nd, Capitol, ktlt, capstal, catf) and a connotatson
of ‘stapid’ ton ‘catf’.

ThesonSchtihm,
eget translem
ation issoas foltkapitales
ows: ‘Polonian: IchKaIb
stel te denamoabningen.’
Julsas Canon sot: tch wend oaf dem Kapirol amgnbracht; Bnatas bnachte mich am. Hamlet: Es wan bnatal
Schlegel has preserved only two pans and one set of allitenattons, and the dralngan
loses a little in force.

When a litenary passage inclades a doable meaning wtthin a lesical anit, the translator
ftnst attempts to reprodace it with owned containing the same doable meaning: ‘To he
or not to be—that is the qaestion (Scm oder nicht sein—das ist bier die Frage)’ bat the
word’play cannot be preserved in Spanish. If this is not possible, he may try to
substitute n synonym with a comparable doable meaning: ‘The fr’actiona of her faith’
(Tr’oitscr and Ct’eotida, V. ii), Die Tr’ammne ihret’ Lieb’ and (Tieck) Tees.
Again, if this is not possible, he has to choose between distributing the two senses of
the fenical unit oven two or more lestcal nails:

And yet the spacioas breadth of this division

Admits no orifice for a point as nabtle
(Troilat and Ceennida, V. ii)
Und doch gnwahrt die weitgespaltene Kluft
Urn einzndningnn ntcht den hleinnten Zugang
Fiit ninen Punkt, fein, win Arachnes Faden
(Ludwig Tteck)

orsacnificing one of the two mrantngs(e.g. by replacing the two meanings nf’infennal’
by the word ‘serdammt’, as OUR teanslaror did to Sean O’Casey’s annoyance).
In translatingimuginasive litenatarn where it has been often satd that the trunslatuble
element is the poetry, a stimulating, flatly untrue and typically ‘literary’ comment—
the biggest loss in meaning (i.e. the total effect en the reader) is due to the peculiar
meraphonscal propertIes rather than the snandelfects of the forntgn language.
Metaphor is the corn of poetry and metaphors bused on nature and its fruits are
auuaffy rooted in a particular environment. Normally, a translator fends he carol least
follow some nI the neiginal’s assonance and allitreatinu (if he is translating poetry, he
often fellows metre and rhyme), but given that metaphnr, both stock and original, a
in itself a kind of implicit accompanyIng translation of a word on idiom (metaphor
 Translation and the metalingual fanction of lattguage 109

therefore translates or metaphorizes meaning) often rooted in the source language or its cultsre, isis not surprising that isis not possible to transfer the ‘tmo’ tensions to
another language.
note that in a, say, twenty-line Hamletpassage, about adoern metaphors are mssssng
in Schtrgel’s tension. Si ncr stock metaphors are a kind of cultural deposit on a
language and reflect a speech community’s cultural focus (lust as orsginal metaphors
usually reflect a writer’s personal interests), the dsffscutty in translating them o agatn a
reflection of caltural distance, which is usually considerable earn in two contiguous
language areas Howeser, this paper has been concerned only with metaphor as an
aspect of word-play.
In imaginatis’e literature, osents and people hate a more or less symbolical character,
which is assented an the more goserat words that denote them. In a passage from
Valery’s Var’iété (Stendhal) describing the period 1810—1830: ‘Quelqurs-uns so sontairni
confasémont sun Ia tête tout on dchalaud dr coiffures, one perraqar, one
an bonnet rouge, an chaprau a plume tricolore, on chaprau a comes, on
chapoao bonrgeois’—connotation, metonymy, metaphor, word-play merge into each
other. What begins in a language as a connotation (seno sir-rod) is des’eloped till it
attains its own separate sense, a pun on what was once its prim ary sense. The
translator then may hate to decide, as is many cases of metalanguage, whether to
follow the morr general concrete or the more culturally influnuced sense, or, as in the
abos’e passage, he may combine thrm both: ‘Some had the confused sensation of
wearing a whole pile of headgear hanging os’rr them like a scaffold—the nobleman’s
wig, the priest’s scull-cap, the red cap of resolution, the patriot’s hat with tricolour
plume, the cocked hat, the bourgeois hat.’ Note here that all objects are cultunally
bound escept possibly coiffure, and that ehapeau is at least more generalized than
pon’oqoo (s’intually obsolete). With their connotations, they are cern more localized
but not confined to French culture.

Howeser, in the following too-well-known poem by Hrine, the ‘two cultures’ almost
neutralize each other, and the tropical translator would hate problems with Fichsenbaum,
which appears much ma or specific than Palme, and the gender of the two trees.
Em Fiebtenbaum strht ninsam
Im Norden auf kabler Hdh!
thu nchlafert; mit weifler Decke
Umhütlen hr Em and Schner.

EntraumteoneinerPalme,
DiefrrnimMorgenland
Einsamundschweigrndtrauers
Auf brennrnder Felsenwand.

In translating any specimen of metalasguage, there are usa ally problems and
alternatis’rselalions, and whilst, pace Catford, nothing is untranslatable, a supplementary
gloss (in the TL and the SL( is often required. Metalanguage is often
signalled by espressions such as ‘so-called’, ‘by definition’, ‘so to speak’, ‘literally’,
‘sometimes known us’ (br esample: ‘sometimes collectisely known in England an
“fancy cheeses” should be translated as: qui, en GrandeBr’esagne, nest par-fain
110 Apponanhes to translation

designees aeon Ic neon de fancy cheeseo’ ]fromages de laxe]; it would be incorrect to

write: seas Ic noon do ft’omages de laxe [fancy cheeses]), ‘often referred to as’,
‘figurative’, ‘in the foil sense of the word’, ‘with a similar meaning’, ‘in a restricted
sense’, ‘synonymously’, ‘in this sense’, ‘as another generation pat it’ or by italics or
inserted commas—t list them as some writers are apt to translate them literatly or
ignore them with nonsensicat results. However, mrtatanguage, except in imaginative
ttteeatuee where either the force oe the meaning of figurative tuoguoge way havr tube
sacrificed, can often be neatly handled.
PART TWO

Some Propositions on Translation

Introduction

There is no such thing usa lass of teanslatiou, since lairs admit of noenceptiom. There
can be and are serious theories of translation, but these apply only to certain types of
test, and all are at various points hetsseen the continuum of transmitter and receccer
emphasis. There can be no vatid sinfle comprehennive theory of translation, and no
feneral afreement on the element of invariance, the ideal translation neil. the defrer
of translatability, and the concepts of equivalent-effect and congruence in translation,
although all these quenlions are worth pursuing, particularly if interesting esamples
are produced in support of an argument. (Eucellent books hare been written
producing true and pertinent instances in favour of misguided theses: purely theoretical
treatises on translation are even less profitable than mOst purely theoretical
treatises.) In spite of the claims of Nida and the Leipeig translation school, who start
writing on translation where others lease off, there is no such thing as a science of
translaliun, and never will be.

If! now set up some rules oliranslution, tam aware that they are somewhere between
Aunt Sallies and reference frames. tam merely suggesting that translators should test
some of these problems against them. A word can be legitimately stipulated to mean
anything (‘let us assume for the purposes of this essay that “egg” means “love” ‘);
is the overriding factor in nIl teunslution, and has primacy over any rule,
theory or primary meaning.

113
Linguistics of translation

1. Range and acceptability of enitneatinun

Whene theee is an accepted collocation in the source language, the translator must
find and use its equivalent in the target language, if it mists. A collocation consists
basically of tire en three lenient (semetimes called lull, doscripioe, substantial) mends,
usually linked by grammatical (empty, functinnal, relational) needs. e.g. ‘a mental
illness’. The cnllocates isithin a collocatiun define and delimit each ethen by
efiminatief at least same of them othen possible meanings; the defining maybe mutual
and equally balanced, but mace often it is closer for one cullocale than let the othen.
Thus ‘to pay attention’ is a collocation, since it reduces the numb or of senses in cshich
‘pay’ can be used to one. The stand ‘attention’ is not so radically affected. hut ii
excfudes ‘attention’ is the sense of ‘cute, solicitude’. ‘To buy a hal’ is not
collocation, since it does not appreciably delimit the sense of ‘buy’ or ‘hat’. Howeser,
coflucattons shade off into ashen grammatically linked wordgroups without a sharp

A collocation is the element of system in the lrsis of a language. It may be syntagmaiic

or honizontat, therefore consisting of a common structure; ur paradigmatic onsertical,
consisningof words belongingto the same semantic field which may substitute for each
other or be semantic opposites. These become collocations only when they are
arranged syntagmatically.
Syntagmatic coltocat ions can be divided into acres main geoups:
(a) Verb pfuo verbal noun. Esamples: pay attention, suffer a defeat, run a meeting,
makr a speech. The verb is the collocate for which thr translator must find the
appropriate equivalent. The verbs in these cotlocations merely have an operative
function (they mean ‘do’) and no particularized meaning since thr action isespressed
in the noun. Some verbal nouns have a small range of coflocates; others, like diavouin,
Lob, Diewst, burn one obvious collocute (pt’onoscet, opmndes, leioirn).
(b) Deter’euinet’ pluo adjective plus noun. The appropriate adjectisr has to be found
for the noun. There isa much wider range of choices than in )u), and the force of this
category of collocation is usually only established by contrast with another language.
Thus ‘a large apple’ but unegr’oooepomme; ‘a taflman’ but an hommegi’and; ungi’and
homme but ‘a gneat man’; an beau gat’çon but ‘a good looking man’; ‘a pretty girl’ but
not (usually) ‘a pretty boy’. Same nouns have one particularly suitable adlective in an
extensive variety of areas, particularly for physical qualities (e.g. woman: dark, slim,
middle-aged, short, young) which, for other objects, would require different adjec.
tives, whilst ash or nouns (eg. ‘criticism’) have a narrow sheaf 0f adjectives for each
srgmrnt ala variety of areas (appt’ofondi/gr’iindlich; anadine nichusagend).
114
 Linguistics of trurslutiur 115

(c) Adverb plus adjective. The most suitabte adveeb must be tooked for. These
coftocations tend to cliché (e.g. ‘immensely important’). The collocation is much raree
in Romance languages, wheee its equivatent teansposttioo so ‘adjective plus adjecttvat
dune imme000 importance. Note however: vachemenidur, ‘damn hand on
‘bloody hand’. This collocation, which is ma re restncied and tess frequent (therefaee
tue tess important) than (a) and (b), is much at the mercy of fashion.

(‘shine
d) Verb plusbrightly’,
adverb or adjectiv‘smelt
e. This is a mucsweet’,
h smallen cahart
tegory: tharbeiten.
e adverb on adjective must be looked for. Examptrs: ‘week hard’, fleinoig arbeiten, ‘feel welt’,
(chatter’.
e) Subject plus vertnb.some
There are twcases,
o groups: firsparticularly
t, the noun and verb maywhen
mutuattreferring
y attract each othtoer: ‘thanimals,
e dog barks’, ‘thethecat purverb
rs’, dan Tiusaalty
erfrinsi, ‘the belhast rings’no, ‘teeth
other subject. to the second group, three is merely a fairly high espectatson that a
particular verb will follow the subject: ‘the door creaks’, le clocherpointe, leo champs
ne djroulent, etc., and here the right verb must be looked for. tn French, some of
thrse verbs are often found as past partiuiplrs or in udlectival clauses qualifying these
subjects (used as eroffemerrr with tow semantic content), and then they require no
translation in Engtish: la mai505 qui ne dresuesar la colline, ‘the house on the hilt’.
(f) Couninoun plus ‘of plot mass noun. This restricted colfocation consists of a term
denoting a unit of quantity and the word for the substance it quantifies. The
appropriate unit must be looked for in the target language, e.g. ‘a loaf of bread’, ‘a
cake of soap’, ‘a pinch of salt’, ‘a pannicte (or a cloud) of dust’, etc., if it
(g) Collective oounplun count noun. The collective noun has lobe discovered: e.g. ‘a
hunch of keys’, ‘a flock of geese or sheep’, ‘a pack of cards or hounds’.
Wider and tess easity categorized cottocations include nominalizations (in particutar,
nouns premodified by one or more nouns), introducing the name of an object (or unit
of quantity) by a term for its size, composition, purpose, origin, desiination, etc.,
which is now rapidly superseding the ‘noun plus “of’ plus noun’ collocation; the
whole range of phrasal verbs, and various items of a sequence including
activity/agent/instrument/object/artnibute/source/place, etc.: e.g. ‘buke/baker/oven/
bread/fresh, new, stale, musty/flour, yeast/bakery’.

Stytisticatty and semanticatty, clichés ann a subgroup at coltocations in that one of

theircottocatrs has diminished in value or is utmost redundant, as ofirn in ‘grinding to
a halt’, ‘fitihy lucre’, etc., and the transtutor muy ho rntitlrd to roplacracliché with a
less common collocation, if it clarifies the content without distorting ii.

Paradigmatic collocations may be based on well-established hierarchies such as

kinship (‘fathers and sons’), colours (‘emeratd is a bright groen’), scientific tasonomien
and institutionat hierarchies where the elements of the culture for each language
often have their own distinct linguistic tikeness (Abbild), although the estralinguistic
object may be the same. Alternatively they may consist alike various synonyms and
antonyms that permeate alt languages.

Antonyms may be classified under threr heads:

116 Apprnanhnn It

(a) Objects which complement each ethos so teem a set (‘land, sea, air’), eta goaded
series (‘ratings, petty officert, othcers).
(b)Qaalities(adjectisosoradiectisalnnunt)whtch ateconttaty,sshichmayhavea
middle term (e.g. ‘interested disintetestrd tinintetestrd’), or ate contradtetory. Contradictory
polar terms are shown formally, i.e. through aftuses: ‘perfect imperfect,
loyal/disloyal’. (Saffises base mitch stronger fosce than prefixes: ef. ‘faithless unfatthfat’.)
Contrasy polar teems are usa ally shown lexically: ‘hot cold, young old, lauthful
treacherous’. In a test, sach collocations asiially appear as alternate’es: e.g. ‘hard or
soft; clear, obseute or vague’.
(e) Actions (serbs ot verbal nouns). In two-term collocations, lbe seeotd term
converse or reciprocal; ‘attack defend; gisetteeise; action reaction’. In theee-torm
colloeations, the second and thitd tetms tepresent posittve and negattee responses
rerpectisety: ‘often accept eefase, besiege hold out sareendee’.
Actions may atso complement each othet as in (a): ‘walk run, sleep woke’.
Theer are two typrs of synonym collocation. The main type is the ‘inclusive’
colincation which includes (a) the hietarehies of genus species subspecies, etc.. and
nay indicate the degree of genetality (or partieulatiiy( of any lesteal item, and with it
the appropriate caftgory (Ober’bngnffn orsuperntdinates): e.g. ‘the brass to the
orchestra’; ‘pump or grease-gun’; ‘on equity on the market’. Fleeho is a genetic term
Ins ‘rpier’, and a specihe term forfleehe (slender spire perforated with windows); (b)
synecdocbe, where part and whole are sometimrsussd indiscriminately with the same
refrrrnce (r.g. char-iorpor’te-ouiil, ‘strings violins’); (c( metonymy, where ‘Bonn aoif
‘the West Orrman government’, ‘the City’ and ‘British bankers’ way agate he
interchanged. The second type of synonym cellocation is usually an old idiom such as
‘with might and main’ and ‘by hook ot by crook’ (see Proposition no 14 tshete it
fnons an exception)—which is likely to have a Germanic (aaf Biegen oder Breehen(
but not a Romance (coats que coil/c) one-to-one equivalent.
Callncations are thr lesical (not grammatical) tramlines of language. Whete a
teanstaton finds current and equally common corresponding collocations in source and
target language tests, it is mandatory to ass thrm; they ate among the invoriant
components of tsanstation They may be factual or extra-linguistic, denoting institutional
teems (e.g. In Pt’ureidentde Ia Republique) as well as linguistic. A translator must
be conversant with them not only to follow them bus also to know when to ‘break’
them (going off the tramlines) when they ate broken in lbt sonree langaugn test.

2. The core of a thaoghtt logical strocture

In aoy fanny oe ohseueed syntactical (surface) structure, the traoslasor’r job is to find
the anderlying (deep) structure. In my opinion, the most useful procedure is to
discover the logscal sublect fsrst, then its spreific vrrb, and let nhr test fall into place.
The basic structure, from which all others gow, is: animate (human) subject plus
operator (tranritive seth) plus inanimate diseet object, and this rheuld be looked for
first. For esample: (a) . . . darts lenquelo l’initiasiee par’lementair’e pour-rail encore
scoot-cot’ pkinemens, ‘where Parliament cnuld still take a full initiative’, (b) If ens ‘are
 Linguistics oftemsslstinn 117

qu’a,tetolutiottpleittementsati.tfaituttte dun probldme sett pt’opooee pus’ lee orateus’o

‘it’s not often that speakers in Parliament propose a fatty satisfactory
solution of a problem to a mintslet’.

3. Three series sf sesea,stic sategss’ies

Lesicol items hose perhaps three series of semantic categoetes; the translator may
hose to test an item against each series, in order to establish lbe senso of the word tn
the contest. (I use ‘sense’ foe one type of meaning of a word.)
Thefirot (ordinal) oerieo consists of sis categories 0f application:
(a) The primary us’ nuclear senne (eememe): i.e. the first and immediate sense
suggested by the word alone, without or completely out of contest. Most words
probably hose prim ary senses broadly accepted by educated people, e.g. lesicogra
phees. ‘Time’ is a concept before it is an occasion; ‘green’ is a colour, not a feeling;
one ‘pays’ money before one pays one’s respects, regards, attention, etc. The primary
sense, which is determined by usage, is sometimes absurdly confused with its illusory
‘true’ or ‘literaL sense when the word has been taken from another language (‘s’irtue’
means ‘courage’) or its etymological meaning (‘nice’ means ‘ignorant’, oe later,
‘delicate’). The prim ary sense is always the most frequently and/or widely diffused
sense of the woed ala particularperiud of time. The earliest etymological sense of a
mend is sometimes superseded us primary sense by two on mote secondary senses.
This occurs particularly is the case of compounds such as concours, ouflteben,
einetellen and some English pheasal serbs (‘put up’, ‘take is’, ‘get on’). A frequency
count would establish a theoretical prim ary sense, but these words cannot be
translated in isolation, and they usually base two senses. When a word has a concrete
and figuratise sense lbe concrete is usually primary (ponciuel is an euception); many
words with conceptual senses hose lust the concrete senses with which they originated.
Note that in spite of purists and archaicizers, the prim aey sense of ‘nice’ remains
‘pleasant’.
(b( The oecondaryoenses: these are established in series of related collocations. Thus
‘time’ premodified by an adjectice or a numeral may be us ‘occasion’; in a historical
contest, it may be a ‘period’; peemodified by ‘long’, ‘short’, etc., it is ‘an amoent of
time’; in music, it is the teem used to classify basic, rhythmical patterns. Similarly
aoturer, whose prim ary sense is, I think, to ‘preside’ (e.g. eleciticity) has secondary
senses ‘to assure’, ‘to make stable’ (collocated with a concrete noun as diced
objectice), ‘to insure’ and ‘to assure’ as technical insurance terms. (Isconcercation,
‘to assure’ is the prim ary sense.) It is often an empty serb and theeefore omitted in
translation (e.g. Ia maine utoure une permanence Ic dimanehe: ‘the office at the town
hull is open or Sundays’.
(c) Denicedoecondarysenoeo. These are the cariations or nuances on cueh secondary
sense. Whilst second ary senses do not ocerlap each other, their sets of dericed tenses
are mote em less mutually synonymous (e.g. assure, guarantee, certify, muinsain).
(d) N once oenoeo: these are lb e senses that occur only in one collocation: e.g.
time-saser, time-bull, time-bargain, uotunen le pueillon.
118 Appeaaehes to

(e) New senses, i.e. new senses of a word. These may be called eemaniw (as opposed
tefoemal) neologisms.
(8) Hapa.e seneca. These ace meanings shot ace only found in a single osample or
Unless the tent is basicall yeapressis’e (as in James Joyce), the translator mast not
semantic neologisms or hapaa scenes esithoat captaining them.
The second (qaalitatee’e) series basically comprises Soon categories of meaning:
physical, figunative, technical and collequial. Mane delicately, we can distinguish

(a) Phyaicalot’ionccete. Eaisting is material form, and perceptible to the senses (e.g.
apple, high, throw, position (of a place)).
(b) Conceptaal or’ abstract. Perceptible to the mind (e.g. height, brave, dread).
(c) Figae’aeii’e ui metaphorical. Basically, this is the transfer of a material to a
conceptual souse, and therefore the transfer of (a) to (b), e.g. canny smile, etc.
Figurative language ranges all the way from fossilized, i.e. virtually imperceptible (‘I
weighed him apI and cliché to recherche, original and idiosyacratic, which it maybe
difficult for the translator so spot, let aloue to translate. In length, it ranges from the
single word, where it may also boa simile, a metonymy, asynecdoche, a peesonificaties,
an epanym,5 a hyperbole, etc., through the phrase or idiom (ceo Stitch dutch
acme Rechnung, saatee’aaayeax, ‘by hook or by crook’), the proverb, the parable, the
fable so the allegory. Si ace noue of these linguistic (not necessarily literary) devices
immediately reflects entralingaistic reality, the translator maybe compelled to change
the vehicle or the scenario in order to preserve the teaor.
(d) Technical os opecialized. Here a particular sesso of a term is officially or
traditionafly standardized within a trade or profession. This category is distinguished
because isis isolated from the webs of meanings and synonyms that often make up the
physical and figurative categories of a word.
(r) Caftar’af. The special sense depends on a group eeferencr, e.g. gay, trip,
revisionist. The particular prejudicial and prejudiced cultural senses of some words
base to be noted by translators.
(f) Familiar’, cone’er’saeionul, slang, e.g. ‘old’ in ‘old boy’; ofter only io
e.g. ‘son of a gun’.
(g) Zero: words in collocation whose meaning is virtually swallowrd ap, e.g. ‘pay’ a

Single items may have their senses in (a) and (b), or (a) and (c), but not in (b( and (c).
Items in (d( may also be in (a), (b( or (c). Thus muasit’ (U) is (a) ‘solid , (b( ‘heavy’ or
‘massive’ (maaaicrr’Angr’iff), (d) asuoan,a ‘masvif’. Accident (F) iv (a) ‘ureverress of
ground’, (b) ‘chance event, often misfortune’, (d) medical disordes, as is ‘cardiovascular
accidents’. These are a few esamples from thr categories
 LiegaiStics uf trassiatiur 519

The teanslator sometimes makes his woest mistakes by setecting feom the wrsing category. Its then dif icult to know whether a word is applied in its material,
cirisonceptmore
ual figurarlikely
i ’e or technitocal sbeense,(a)the laot er ‘coolie’s
not known to thehas’.
translator.Restricted
A chapeas chiuosi muymearsngs
boa ‘Chinese posinit on’(d)or a ‘ace
inglisg ohmiclcae
c (d), butaridas a
in one field of technology, but they often base a different meaning is
another, and, of course, there maybe two or thcen terms for it wstkss she technology,
depending on she register, shot is, who is using the term In both (b) (ignores’, ignore, i’ealioei’, realise, couieolei’, control) and )d) (couple, vernier, tolerance, iufel, accident,
objet ironic, r’euiniance) the isguesce of English bus to be accounted got. In the
microconfest (i.e. narrow contest) of: Ce cebit pan seulemenl sire r’egle a cabal,
un uombi’e doe qu’il ai’ait a Ia place du cocos’, sombre doe appears to
offer a choice from (u( ‘golden number’, (b) ‘wealth’, )c) ‘a magic formula’, )d) ‘a
gold es sectior’ (a formula in fine acts (A: B 0: A + B) tori a perfect ratio), (c) ‘an
efficient tool’; only the macrocontrxt can decide.
Firally, concrete and figuratii’e applications must not be confused with primary and
secondary senses respectively. Is rum cross cases, the liguratii’e or conceptual
application of a word becomes its primary meaning (e.g. eronner, charm, etc.).
The third (togicaf) series consists of four categories of semantic application, whose
rormaf definitions I propose to adapt slightly:
(u) Denotation (contrxtuat(. The direct sprcific meaning of a word, optimully shown
ustensively (i.e. in phoro or diagram achy printing) and described as far as possible is
summary observable terms; the cognifisr meaning. The denotation of ‘Auschwste’ is
‘Oswircim’.

(b) fnienuiori(ersrra-contestuul) Property or group of properties conrotod by oterm

which ocr essen fiat so the thing named; the set of attributes brlongisg to anything to
which a seem is applied. Therefore the inrension of ‘Auschwitz’ may be any ‘small
Polish provincial town’, but foe the feanslarue. it depends or the function of the word
in the passage. Again, the intrusion of ‘knife’ includes ‘(sharp) (metal) (this) blade,
hardfe, cursing’ depending on the passage. Semic or comporenrial analysis may be
subsumed under intension, and is required whrn one-to-one word irunslusion is out of
she question, and the translator does not want to tmunsliterato, since the teem will
mean nufhing to the TL reader.

(c) Extension (exrra-correnrual). The totaf range over which something con be
esreuded or esionds; the clann of things to which a 50mm iv applicable, ho goospol
things denoted by a term.
‘Auschwitz’ has so denotative cstrssior, but stir connotative outension is ‘Buchenwald,
Dachau, Oranirnburg, Ravrnsbruck, Belsen, Mouthausen, Treblinka, Beterk,
Woleek, Sachsrnhuuson’, tic. Tho denotutiso enlcnsion of ‘knife’ in ‘poskvt,
rabte, bread, carving, etc . knife, sword, dagger’.
(d) Connotation (cuntextual). Thur aspect of meaning uS a particular word or
word-group which is based on the freings and worst ideas it causes in the transmitter
urrecepror. Ibis colloquial; the meaningcorveyed or suggested apart from the thing it
120 Approaches to translation

explicitly xamex or describes. It is a more or text powerful smptscatson. It may be precixe, e.g. the ‘filth’ of ‘mud’, or imprecise, e.g. the ‘costness’ of ‘home’. It may, en
normal usage, greatly exceed or eren eoclode the denotatson of the word, e.g. to ‘Auschwite’. The connotation of ‘Auschwitz’ is t s prtmaty meonsng: mass-murder,
genocide, unpeecedentod crime’.

A fourth possible special series of categories apptses to adtrct ves or roche eelat ng to (a) objects, (b) persons, (c) concepts derived from actions, qaalstses aed sabstaeces.
Thus (a) a green ease, (b) he’s green, (c) gsren cony; (a) deo mote tracalents, (b) use
homme truculent; (b) an homme detectable; (a) an ps’onoolic deseorable; (b) 1 55051
Ia liberte; (c) Ia force des peapleo none a lear jruseooe; (a) un ceo frao; (b) unr fellr
frafrhe; (c) us accaeilfraio. Thus all words can he related to people, thsngs, or the
proprrlies derived from them.

4. Enaluative language

The translator has to detect and assess esalaative language, which represses the SLT
authot’s or reader’s or his peer group’s rsplicit or implicit value-judgments, not to
mention the valae-jadgmontt of the provaitiag SL oe TL caltuee. Some woeds, such
as ‘good’, ‘fair’, ‘terrible’, ‘passable’, ‘escellest’, ‘superb’, bane a vague meaning
until they are placed on a scale which can be derived from the writer’s values or
those at the group where the words’ currency originates; the words may then bane to
he ‘converted’ to correspond so the value-scales of an analogous person on group in
the TL caltuer. Other words are partly evaluative and partly informative (perceptive,
stupid, pigs (police), star, judicious, etc.). German has an apparently unique
series of ameliorative intormatis’o prjoratires’eebs: abes’raochen, crrblsaffes (erotausex),
befreetden, but most languages have series lot die, kill, man, woman, love,
smell, eat, drink. A third set of words are at face value infonmative and obtain these
evaluative aspect from the culture they derive from: e.g. democracy, booefeois,
conservative, revolutionary, communist, monarchist, revisionist, formalist, etc. If
the evaluative aspect of these words is not carried over into the target language, the
leanstalor musl assist his readre, possibly with a footnote, bettet by characterizing
the translated word (peolrtaeian ideal, revisionist subversion, narrowly conservative,
etc.) to preserve the thought-content of the original. Moreover the translator may
have himself to evaluate lhr degree of subjectivity in the evaluations made by the SL

5, The male sf linguistic intensity

Language is written on a scale of intensity as well as evaluation; all words repressing

acfsoos or qualitses to some esseot ate tanged ox a dine betwern sttrngth and
weakness, energy and inertness. Evaluating the degree of intensity is apt to be
subtrctsve. It is difficult to translate a noun phrase such as ‘mild hostility’, as ‘mild’
ts perhaps somewhere between fdger and moddre and feicht and md/Jig.
 Linguistics of translation 121

6. Register or socially conditioned language

The SLT author uses self-expressive language detibreately sshen he expresses his ossn
vteo’s and unconsciously, eithee through psycholinguistic markers or through register’
mhich hus become an imprecise blanket teem to cover att the sociutty conditioned
features of language. Sociolinguists such us Gumpera (1975) und Gofgman (1975) hose
noted thut in certain notes and/or situations, peopte speak (or phone or ssrttr—notes
or tests or letters or diaries), as emptoyers, engtnrers, dustmen, soot, lovers,
strangers, graduates, illiterates, beggars, prestdents, mursssts, etc., end tvtll have
specihc verbal repertoire, expressed phonologically, syntactically and tesically, although
this repertoire may otten be a marginal and even insignificant part 0g their
discourse. The main social determinants of speech or writing brhaviour are, according
to Goggman, age, sos, class, occupation, caste, religion, country ogontgin,generatton,
region, schooling, cultural cognitive assumptions, bilingualism, etc. (‘Each year, more
are reported’). They are also inguenced by the mode and the occasion, both equally
socially conditioned, of the speech or writing event. Their main interest toa translator
is that they provide him with a certain lexical field, mhich at best he should assimilate
by appropriate reading in the SI. and TL (particularlyTL) and some characteristic
word ‘deformations’ (noted particularly in French medical literature), as melt as
syntactic markers (e.g. passives and noon phrases premodified by two or three nouns
in electronics literature) running through the testn. If the ‘register’ isostremely
remote from standard educated language, the translator may have to abandon his
endeavour to maintain functional equivalence and produce an information translation,
a kind of reported speech. The socially conditioned nature of language is
particularly important in dramatic literature and in advertising. Normally, the
translator should no more imitate class or regronat dialect (unless they are his own)
than he should antiquate his writing to translate a classic—it sounds too artificial; one
false note will find him oat. Is advertising, the pictorial illustration may give the
translator a better clue to style than the SL test.

7. Language and reference

All non-literary passages, most sentonces, are partly language, partly external reality;
partly sense, partly reference; porn’ pragmarics, partly somonnics (following Pcirce
and Morris); partly stylistics, partly cognition. A linguistically difficult sentence may
be dehoed as a sentence where ono-to-000 translation is impossible and the unit
translation is likely to be at least sentence to sentence. Assuming the informative
dominates lb e expressive and rho vocative function, and he is confident that he
understands the ref rococo perfectly. the translator car ‘go to town’ on the sentence:
he usually jettisons the SL syntas and clarifies the lesis, frequently strengthening and
simplifying its oppositional or diutrotical elements: ‘En manièrr d’arthnitc lee
diffdrrntes théoapeutiqses, loin de s’rsclure tune l’autre, no provent quo bénéficier
de ‘addition 01 it fast répdter a teas let echos quo Royat r’esclut pas Ia rhirurgie de
bosne indication, qui, ellemfmr, n’esclat pas lanage do Ia pharmacopér. En fail. Ia
créoothdrapir or los medications diversrs soot do honor indication. Le soul probtème.
poor nous chirurgiros est de savoir dans quetles conditions l’actioo ext opportune.’ In
these srotcocos, Royal tallies with cr’énotinén’apie, chin’ur’gie with action, phar’macopéo
122 Approaches to

with medications, and all three treatments ate either opposes Oi combined under
iinheeapeuifactiqursthe. Once there
this structuremain
is perceisekinds
d, the teansoflatrontreatment
of the sentence presare
ents noallproblethems: ‘Theniere
sari005 treeffecie’e
atments fee arthritwhen
s are not mutthey
ually escare
luse’e.
combined. NoopportunityshonldbelostofemPhasioingthutmmneralwatertreatment (e.g. at Royat) coo be applied in conjunctien with surgery, when it is strongly
recommended and surgery need not peeclade the use of drags. In fact, both mineral waice and canons drugs base shown good results and the only problem for the
surgeon is deciding under what conditions to operate.’
On the other hand, in a relerenlially difficult or ambiguous passage, ihe teanslaioe,
particularly if he has no access to the authorof the SL tent, most play for safety, erring
on the side of word for word literalness if be mast, and retaining any ambiguity,
which, howes’or, he must point ant in a goornote. Since he cannot guide the TL
reader, he can only transfer the facts of the SL tents as neatly and wholly as possible.

8. On ambiguity

Most sent esces carry a deal of lenical and grammatical ambigaity. which may be
linguistic or referential; hopefully all this ambiguity will be cleared up by the
micro- and the maceocontent. Where the ambiguity remains in spite of the macrecontest,
the trasslulne haste determine whether it is referential or linguistic, or between
the two estremes. Thus in the sentence: ‘Brusquement us malude presente one
efflorescence de production pathologique’, rffloteacrncr is referential if it means ‘rash,
eruption’, but linguistic if ii means ‘outburst’ (more likely in the content of delirium,
in unaffected and idiosyncratic style of writing). A referential ambiguity must always
be retained asd pointed out, if it cannot be cleared up by an espert. A linguistic
ambiguity may enrich a tent at both meanings may be intended, and the translator
should attempt to reproduce the ambiguity, but if he is unable to do so, hr normally
translates one of lhr meanings and lets the other go. Whilst lenical ambiguitirs are
more commas, grammatical ambiguities arise when the point of stress in a clause or
when relationships between word-groups or clauses in a larger unit are not clear, i.e.
one does not know ‘what goes with what’.

9, Language as cede and system

The translator is ooneinuausly made aware of the functional and structural nature of
language, which appears to him in she common dynamic-functional simile of a game
of chess and the slaeic-slluctaral simile of a crossword puzzle. Thus one mistransluird
word may still make hall’consiscing nonsense at a passage since it orces salid senses
fsememes)oe to other words and phrasesie the passage. When the word in corrected,
the whole passage is switched along different lines. Herein an enample, adapted from
Giraudoux’u Suzanne ee Ic Pacifique: ‘II balançait des écorces deranges creusen sans
len cooler, it se ertirait de dean metres qunnd du cole de Ia Chine as Ic tieuit, it
semblait de tastes sen vagues se regurder que s’ous seule.’ ‘He threw away same
orange peel without pulling it fm-lively aside, he drew quietly back two yards when he
 Linguistics uf trarnlutiue 123

was pulled in the Chinese direction, he uppeaeed with es’ery fresh wat’e nf emotion to
look at you alone.’

When ilis coreected to eefer to le Pacifique, which is the last word in the previous
sentence, this becomes: ‘The ocean cocked some bits or orange peel about without
letting them sink, it softly withdrew a few feet when it was pulled towards China, it
appeared to look at you alone with its et’rry ware.’
For the translator, lanfuage is a code which he is well aware he will never break, a
system he cannot wholly frasp, because it is lexically infinite. All he can do is make
assumptions about it, in accordunce with the benefits hr derives from it, dependinf or
the yield that suits the users at the time; the assumptions, like the sense of the words,
wilt change continuously. tie is frequently faced with too little estralinfuislic reality
and too much linfuistic ambifuity—words either too far out of their usual
or so frequently in them that they become meaningless cliché, fitting us loosely as yule
keys in the huge locks of their contest. Nes’er was the inadequacy of language to
designate extralioguistic reality shown up more clearly than in Lord Birkett’s remark
at the Nnremberg trials: ‘Alt this es’idencr! But one picture would be worth a
thousand words.’i

10. Varieties of interference

One touchstone of a good translator is his srnsttivity to interference, which affects

trrmtnology and language, the encyclopaedia an machas it dues the dictionary. There
are perhaps nine aspects of intrrlerence:

(a) Cnttncatinns or lesemes with similar form in SL and TL, but different meanings.
(b) As above, but with the same meaning, and therefore to be translated ‘straight’
(therefore, strictly, nun-interference!).
(c) SL syntactic structures inappropriately superimposed on TL.
(d) SL word order, or word phr’asc order, inappropriately reproduced.
(e) Interference from third language known to the translator.
(f) Primary meaning of word interfering with appropriate contextual meaning.
(g) Stylistic predilections of translator.

(h) The primary meaning of a word, interfering with an important secondary

meaotng, which is also not quit rio close to the related word in the TL: ‘Le chaluhrr’
beneficie,aa de douze jouct ci demi de reponpar moLt de mer, comme non camaxade du
commerce’—’hts counterpart in merchant ships’. (From Adcanced Non-firet’at’y Texrn,
Lécayer and Virey.)
(i) The translator’s idiolect, including his regional and social dialect.
When one is continuously aware 0g all these pitfalls, one is perhaps on the way to
becoming a good translator. On the other hand, a good tranolation shows neither
124 Approaches to translation

deliberate opposition nor subservience to interference; its language ts oncontaminotrd

by it.

11. Connotation and denotation

Continuum, scale, bolueco, dine, pendulum, see-saw—the teas-tutor’s job ftnally

contistt of weighing one factor ogoinst another. Occasionally, he has to choose
between the connotatice and denotative semantic featuees of a lexical unit. In aeecrnt

aeticte in Figaro, Bertrand de Jouvenel, the veteran dtplomat, eefeeeed to ‘acme du mail as one of the glories of France (together with the rose-window to Chatters
Cathedral). The connotation for an educated middle-aged reader mtght be the
eponymous title of Anatole France’s novel; fuethee, a hind of Hyde Park Corner, where fierce political opponents can discuss their dif erences. But the connotations ol
mail: peaceful, old, traditional, secluded, beautiful are more powerful. The denotation,
however, is ‘the elms in the public walks in certain towns’. But the rendering
must be simple and uncluttered; the towns hare to be abandoned; I suggest ‘the elms
in the old avenues’.

12, Metaphor again

When the translator is faced with u common problem, that of rendering the image of a
stock SL metaphor by its sense (usually because there is no stock equivalent), he has
to mario mind that the tense nortnally hasseveral semantic elements. Thus nor route
t’ianfe (cf. den campagtseo t’ianfeo) has elements of picturesqueuest, gaiety, giving
pieasurr, ‘sunniness’, and of course laughter, with the general implication that the
road is set in beautiful scenery. If necessary, one coold make a rumponentiul analysis,
contrasting the pius or minus features of riant with 000riant, rayennant, épanoui, and
anyotheritem in this semantic field—setting (town or country), intensity, momentariness,
formality and animation might be some of the dimensions—and then selecting,
say, two trainers toe translation: ‘beautiful country road’. More likely, one would
attempt a translation label such as ‘scenic route’ in the hope that it mill stick, since
route riante is an official term in Belgium.
We have to bear in mind that language when seen diacheonically consists entirely of
metaphors. Dead metaphors have lost all metaphorical sense, and are the ‘normal’,
literal, sane, rational, logical, clear, precise, ‘scientific’ stock of language. As
‘metaphors’ they present no translation problems, and are translated literally
(pester— think) where possible. The essence of the sense of both stock and oetfinal
metaphors is that they encompass a mid er range of meanings than literallanfuage, but
that they are less precise. Normally, original metaphors have a miderrangec
meanings than stock metaphors; they are more suggestive and, at least initially, even
less precise. Thus a reporter, wanting to summarize the situation in lean in one
heading, wrote KAFKA IN IRAN. What is a translator to make of this? If Kafka in
well knows in the TL culture, he sighs gratefully and sranslatrsliserally; otherwise, as
a heading: Bareascracy, Police State, Chaos or Misery in Iran cossld be considered; a
third, less comanstted alternative would be to try another equally large and indefinite
 Linguistics nf translatinn 125

metaphor, such as Fag or Nightmare or Dostoyevsky or Darkness sn Iran, or

‘Alice in a Persian Looking,glass.*

Metaphor is the orrotr espectsior at the ability to see resemblances or contrasted

differences (which is one definition 0g intclltgcncc as wctt an smagtnatton), the normal
spootry)
ign of insos’atioorn in lattempting
anguage as is intentiontoin t fcstic’cn
e. The translatora, excdntt,
ept whenasworkinwetl
g on imugiasnatispoorty
’c writ ng of anywrttten,
kind (foothalt ortestgtnanctwhere
al reports as welthel as
informative lunatics at language is prominent, is mane ttkely to be ncducsng
metaphors to sense than to ho crcatsng them.

13, Similr, mrtnttymy, syoecdnehr

Similev arc mote precise, maco nestnicted and usually less radscat, tess commttted than
metaphors, since they limit th crcscmblancc at the ‘object’ and tn ‘tmagc’ (t’chsclc) to
a single property (‘anal as a cucumber’). Thus they are genre ally easier to translate
than metaphor (simile is ‘weaker’ method at translating a metaphor), and the matn
problem is cultunut, i.e. does one trunxfcr on adapt the simile—is dun blanc do neige
to hr ‘snow-white’, or, in a Middle East country, ‘white as egret leathers’?

Metunymy, whern the name at an oblect is tnanstcnnrd to take the place of somrthsng
etse with which it in associated, normally requires knowledge of the TL culture. Stack
English metonymics such as ‘the Crown’ ton the Monarch, ‘Shakespeare’ ton
Shahcxpnurr’s works, ‘the hod’ foe marriage or ‘ten’, ‘the kettle’ for mater, Ia case or
‘the cellar’ for wine (on buc’ait Ia case du comte, but ‘he keeps a good cellar’) often
cannot be trunsluncd word Ion word; institutional menonymics such ax Rue dn Rivoli,
the Knennlin, the White House, Bonn, mayor may not require explanatory expansion
in the TL, depending on the knowledge of the putative typical reader; original
metunymies, which are rare, since metonymies normally imply a recogniced and
known contiguity, adjacency on cauxal nclanionxhip between one object and nnothrn,
arc translated communicatively unfcxs they arc impnntnnt. Than an aphaniac who
substitutes ‘fork’ for ‘knife’ (Jakobson, 1971) would be connected if interpreted to a
third party, bat the ‘similarity disorder’ must be retained if reported to a doctor.
Synecdnche (i.e. pant for whole, species for genus, a rvice vent a) ix treated similarly,
and thoagh its metaphorical element is often fossiliznd it cannot usually be tranxlated
literally. Thus ‘hands’ is l’équipage, len bowmen, ‘sail ho!’ is navit’e en sue, ‘cutthroat’
is coupe-jan-el and ‘willow’ becomes butte do cr’ickea.

14, Idioms

It one defines idioms as phrases or word-groups whose meaning cannot be elicited

frnmnhn separate mnaningsof each word of which they are lormcd(r.g. ‘hand up’, Itt-c
dons /a dIchr, ‘have on’, faire marcher’), then one Sent notes that thene at-c never
translated word tar word; that since idioms urn eithrr colloquial nr slang, it is oftrn
126 Approaches to translation

difficult to find a TL equis’alent with the some degree of infortnaltty; aod that idioms
pass out of fashion rapidty, no that bitingual dictionaries are their ready vtctimo: tome
coma ear l’hanicet, ‘Yea gise me the wilties’, ‘Yea get on my ttts’ (Hat’tap’o New
Standard French and English Dictionary). Since translators are meant to work tote
their ‘language of habitual use’ (Anthony Crane), they are not usually ‘caught oat’ by
idioms, unless they are mesmerized by their dictionaries. But many espatriate
translators and teachern base a pathetic ponchaut for idioms, forgetting that they are
often affected, pretentious, literary, archaic, confined to one social class, modish,
clichified or prolix (e.g. ‘by hook or by crook’, ‘on a shoe-string’, ‘grind one’s ase’,
‘Simon-purr’, ‘in a pucker’, ‘between Scytla and Charybdis’, ‘between the Desil and
the deep bloc sea’, etc.)—in fact as tiresome and unseenssaey as most peoserbs—and
many people prefer to use literal language combined with some original metaphors.
Porther, ‘last (bat) not least’ (not an idiom) is now a German, not an English phrase.
Theory of translation

15. Well written and badly written texts

The translator has to astett the qaality and i’aloe of the writing in the tearer language
test. The common translator’s distinction between literacy and non-literary texts,

ussaming that the itepeetanceof the first lies in its format elements and of thesecond in itx factnal content, and therefore that the tiext mxxi be translated closely and the
second freely, ix mistaken. An opposite, and equatly misguided stew is that a
non-literary test, being scientific, mast be accarately translated, whilst a literary text,
being artistic, attums infinite licence in trnnstation. It mifht be moee profitable to
regard the eon-literary test as denotative, and theretore to hr translated slavishly in
alt its snrfacr detail, and th5 literary test as connotative,’ and therefore to be
translated to reseat its latent meaning, to point the allegory in the story, the moral in
the actiun, etc., as well ax its senxaens qualities (sound effects, sack as metre and
onomatopoeia, and visual images) if one accepts Moliere’s dictam that the two main
functions of art arr to please (the srnsrx srnsaouxty) and so correct (morally).
Howrver, the basic distinction in not between literary and non-literary tests, bat
brtwrrn fend (or effectisr) and bad (at ineffective) writing. If a text ix well writlrn,
whether it is literary or scientific, historical or technological, its formal components
are of prime importance, and the translator mast respect them and fully account for
them in his version, not by any kind of imitation bat by transposing them through
deep structure (‘mhut does this really mean?’) to congruent formal components. It is
us misgnidrd to sulk about rho ‘art’ at literary translation and thy ‘skill’ of non-literary
translation usIa imply that science is inferior to art. The translation of porsry is often
more difficult than any other kind of translation only because poetry is the only
literary form that uses all the resources of languages, and thrrelare there are
levels of language lobe accounted for.
The translator is, however, entitled to treat the formal components of a badly written
test, whether popular or technical, with ceesidreublr freedom, since by roplucing
clumsy with elegant syntactic structures, by removing redundant or repetitive items,
by reducing the cliché and the vogue-word to a plainer statement, by clarifying the
emphasis and tightening up the sentence, he ix attempting to five the text’s semantic
content Is lull value. (Thus he is pertorming a doable translation, lirxt intra-, then
inrerlingaul.) Nevertheless, the translator is often at risk in declaring a test to be badly
written. A test that is poodrroox, contorted and ornate, that sins against the
fraudulent canons of simplicity, clarity and brevity may indeed be well writtro if it
espresses the author’s personality without distorting his message; it ix only badly
wrstten if the mrsxugr is lost in the convrntional received argon which apprats
designed to make its own irrelevant but ‘with it’ impression.
127
 128 Appeoaches to

16. Translation is for the rrader

A trunslation is normally motion aod ioteoded foe a argot language roudee—ocen 1

the sooece fangooge test was esritton for oo eeadee of aft, foe nothing but its aothor’s
pieusuee. The teanslatee bus to asstst his eeadee. In plato teems, tilt usually mute
ierportuotioehimtomakeoetndrcutefhesense ofapassugethantofonkthotssuoby
tendering it ‘coeeoctty’. He may base to esptoio ur transpose attosiuos, supply
reuseos. emphasioe cuotrasts. Es’eo tithe SL test is gooeraliaed and abstracted or the
aoulogy of oon-tigueatise art or bus whut seems like sureoulistic or stuchustic
it is his duty to make his section a little more accessible to the reader, to
find at bust some puttorn in non-sense. Styles mhich are dense and totcllectualioed
may atso require assistance from the translatorj,A pansage such as:
‘LatVoRdpubttquedoneaitdejatonpoctacledecesgeandsdirecteursqui assorarontla
conitnuite do sers’tce pubtictundis quo passaient lesminiseresmaisce decaitêtee
to regime sutsant quo ten expects jooiraiont do lustre ot do l’eclat dun semblant do
efgne. Techntcsté acceoe do problèmes declares plus complexes, densaisisnements ot

démssssoos do parlomens, gooseenemeets doton done ospoeaoco do Ste plus tongue, on dssttnguatsde noses en motosentro ministrestechniciensethaufsfonctionnaires a
50005500 poittscsenne, on fugeatt qo’une bonne gostion administratise auturisati
i’tmpasse sue to participation politique dos citoyens’,4
cannot be left as it tn and hasto be helped along or tricked out, parttcolarlysshen the
‘writer’s foectton ts presumably infoematise rather than selfexpressico, und oboe the
notes shut a ceetuto construction (in thin case the pent-modified noun-phease
used absotnseiy( so fus’ourtte qutek in the author’s idiotect and, being elltptical, tends
to hamper comprehension.)

The eeoc difficult the tanguago, the more s’ersioes are feasible, and the more
evtdentiy the act of teanstation consists of an ‘acute’ interpeetation after a ‘rocoptice’ comprehensson. The abuse passage might translate as folboms:
‘The Fourth Republic had aiready offered the spectacte of potserfol heads of
departments maintaining the continuity of the public sers’ice white ministers came and

went,but5wasto he egumethatfolt wedthat he sporismoretoenjoytheshowandsplendourofsoemiegiyabsolutepowot.Theincreasinglytochotculnatureofudmtse dlymorecomptesproblems,the nforcedors’oi ntarysurenderofpowerby

parisamenu,theguser me ts’expectaionofalongertenure—thes cir umstancesmadeitmoredsf cuit odistnguishbetwe nminsterswithspecratis knowledgeandhighercts isersues actingaspolitcians,anditwasgen ralyholdthatomphast on
goodinmanagement was responstbbe for blocking the ebectorato’s adsance to paruicupatsoe
politics.’

17, The natnratness of a translation

Normaity, the transiator should write within his own idiolect or his conception of the SL test author’s, always prosuded the text appears to be writ en naturaily. The
 Theory of translation 129

translator most oot O50a ssord or phoase that soands intuitu’ety unsatoral or aeltficial
to him. For this reasoo, it is right that ooe person should teansl0te on a beau doe as
‘whateser one may say’ and onothrr shoald reject tt and one ‘say suhat one may’. From
the point of sims of the thied reader, i.e. the translation erotic or teacher, ten dtfterent
seesions of the name tent may be equatty acceptable. Quot homtneo, tot ocnpta.
Unanimity acer the translation of most sentences mould he arttficsat. If a
accepts a suggested rendering because of the aathority behind it, rather than because
he feels it intuitisely (idiolectally) right foe him, this eendçeing is likely to clash u’ith
the nest of hi users ion—it oct11 not cohere.

For me, a sent ence such as ‘Los coefficients respiratotres sent médiocres et ne portent
guèee a l’audace’ translates as ‘The respiratory quotients are poor and scarcely
encourage radical treatment’ and a sentence such as ‘Tendenoe ancora pib extreme
permett000 oggi di escludere l’operatoee umano anche in certe fasi di produotone
complete’ as ‘Due to euro more radical trends, the human operator is nowadays
eliminated es’en from certain complete production stages’. Obs’iounly, I peetee to be
‘radical’.

The primary meaning (sememe) of audace is too emotise and of euttemo is

esaggerated tome, and I translate both moods as ‘radical’ naturally in these situations.
The mood ‘radical’ in the abuse sense is a basic actise constituent of my idiolect, and
might be out of place in this sense in the murk of nine out often other translators.

18. The frequeusoy ‘ste agaist

The equal frequency rule has precedence user the rule5 that normally a translator
should not translate an SL item into a TL item tshich mould normally and naturally
hose anuthee equisalest in the SL. Thus it maybe legitimate to translate pes’tusbation
(Fr.) as ‘siolent disorder’; foe the translator, the theoretical reason why the SL writee
did not put déuot’ds’e cioleneis that he, unlike the translator, had a more effectise word
asailable.

19. The impns’tanee of the truth

When extralinguistic reality is wrong in the SL text, the translator must say so.
Misstatesnents most either be corrected or glossed. This responsibility is more
important than monitoring the quality of the writing in the SL test. Howesee, the
abuse rule applies only where the informatise function is dominant. Where the SL
test is propaganda or art, the translator may hose no such responsibilities.

20. The limits of synonymy

Translation is in a sense as esercise in synonymy, bat that is no justification for the
ssrtuatly indiscriminute and unreasonable habit of replacing accurate and ubsious
equivalents with synonyms, often practised by the translator to show, whether he
knows it or not, that he has guarded ugaisst intergerence. Thus in a test with a mainly
130 Approaches to

infotmatis’e function, infos’maaioni is ‘irfotmatton’, not ‘data’, ofooao approozabsle ‘appreciabfe effort’, not ‘much effort’, etc., whatever they may be tn a text wsth a
prnsuaxisr function.

21, The three liaguistir scales or hierarchies

Es’en the tranolatoe who keeps insisting that it is the thoughts not the words that court
can sometimes be forced into the admissiar that whateser the ant of transtattos so a
trstoranypartofit,itshouldbeassmaltaspOssible.Theanly’perfect’ltanstattos.
after aft, are of the ‘dog bitco mao’ s’aeicty. Thc unit of traoslattoo t lskcly to ho
smallest when the writing is creutise or legal—administnatisc.
In presoasise writing, the unit of translation might be the paragraph for omotssely
written ads’rrtisiog, the sentence or the halophrosn for public notices, ho word or
phnuse ton a Ingot test.
Teanslatior is complicated by its own use of two kinds 0g usits. Tho grammatical scale
of morpheme, word, word phrase, clause, serteoce, paragraph, ix gcocsally koowe.
The lexical scale, which is penhaps mote imponsant in toosslation. has rat to my
knowledge bets wonked out. Possibly it consists of: semo (minimal element of
meaning)/sememe (one meaning of a wond)/leseme (unin0ccrcd words)/collocation
(transposable construction), e.g. adjectival clause, participal phrase, serb-noun
phrase, reducible to deep sttuctore autonomous (aolbordsdig) thome—rhemo unit
contrasted theme—rheme units/complete section of trst (or paragraph or topic unit).
The last lbrer units are nomotimos replaced by: rstnndod metaphor/proverb/allegory.
The fact that there ore two diffetent scales, and in particular the divergence of the
collocation and she word-phrase, explains why mochior translation has often come to
grief. (The third linguistic scale, the phonological—phoneme/syllable or sonr/goas/breath
or tone group—counts only in poetry translation.)

22. Paraphrase

All roles of translation are basically negative; they attempt to reduce she error factor,
they all register an inability to pnoduce an exact translation. All translation rules are
at attempt to circumt’rnt the translator’s last resort, paraphrase, which too easily
becomes periphrose. Paraphrase is unextended synonym and inesitably an espans ion
d dff f h g It 5 It ly fidwh m ft m I gy
(technical institotianut cultural, ecological, scientific) cannot be handlnd in any other
way, e.g. by TL equisateot, transcription, neologism, by reproducing the ‘encyclopaedic’
tenor for the ltnguistic s’ehicle. A paraphrase can only dtam on encyclopaedic
knowledge, lit ox justifted at all; a linguistic paraphrase is neser justified. A
paraphnase runs counter to the thesis, which 1 broadly support, of W. Agtby, the
Ptorektor of Handelshojskolen at Aarhus, that the best translation is likely to be the
briefest, c. the one neatest to the nomben ol lexical items used in the SL test. The
sntaftost unit of paraphrase is the synonym, and this too most outy be used when the
petmary meaning is inappropriate. In ordinary language, I see so reason for
translating eindruckovofl or impo-eooionoant as anything but ‘impressive’.
 Theory of trooslatior 131

23. Jargon

Jargon is vanionsly defioed as an idiom pecultar to a trade or profes ton, as occapatiooaf register of language, or aorta tori cslaug astntel tgrble to the layman.
One mould espect it to be rich in terms at art, neologtsms, acronyms, rpooymv, etc. Whilst this is otter the case, another characteristic ts Its converse: the frequent use of
or abstract terms, via. dr’crrbals, deadjectivuls and denommals.° When argon

i‘hoase’
s welt used, theseonte‘dwelling’
rms are prefer ed twhich
o concrete andonce
spectftcentermraged
s in order patChurchill,
posely to coven aorwiderthefield; hence the use of ‘accommodatton antI’ rather than
ate of ‘mortally handtcapped’
rather than ‘mad, lanatic’, etc., which Evelyn Waugh preferred. Such
not arty accurate, bat also, as in the latter esample, useful tn combating sluptd
prejudices by eliminating a traditionally emolor semantic feature to a term.
Wtserr jargon is misused, these teems are unnecessary and sometimes ambiguoas;
they are often used fan their effect and prestige vufur, as to ads’rrltsemento (e.g. ‘a
new generation of Dalns’, ‘New Dimension furniture’, ‘lb nec concepts from John
Player’), being longer, morn sophisticated lb an coocre In terms, and derived foam
Latin or Greek.

In a mainly informative passage, the translator should got rid of unnecessary or

ambiguous joegon. In the following passage: Ic cas’actir’e ioflarnmatois’o do Ia doulear’,
exagér’ée par ía moindre rnabilioation el entralnaot Ia mine au repos anlalgique de
l’articufanion, Ic plus soucerner position cicieure, the underlined words are jargon,
and the sentence could be clarified as ‘As the inflammation causes pain which is
aggravated by the slightest movement, the joint, which is usually in an incorrect
position, ban to be rented as a pain-hitting measure’. Furtheresamples of jargon in the

possibilités ar’ticulaires: ‘ability to move their joints’.

posnibiliteofonctinnnelleo: ‘freedom of action’.
rds’eif inflammalaire: ‘recurrence of the inflammation’.
oi l’rnraidionemenr paraft inicirable, qu’il se faose en position de fonctios: ‘it the
stiffening appears inevitable, the patient should see that it happens when the joint is

The common characteristic of this and much other jargon is that it i: generic. It is only
its firm position in the linguistic and situational contest that disambiguates it.
However, the lranslanor is always at risk in narrowing the semantic area of jargon. If
hr saspects that lbr source test writer intended to use a large, rosily adaptable and
disposable phrase, he most retain it in English, even though English does not
embrace such abstractions so easily. On no account must the foreign equivalent of
‘accommodation anit’ hr translated as ‘house’. In doubt, the translator must play foe
safety by preferring the more literal version. In fact, in as far 05 hr practises a scieocr
that reflects etralinguistic reality he neverceases to play for nafety.
Conversely, technical jargon can be removed if it in heavy and used for effect: Dana
eeneoenceprinn, Ia bouffee difirante, ernIe nosgrii.rhique, n’exisrepftan, ‘According to
them, a delirious onset is not a distinct illness at all’.
132 Approaches to translation

24. Emotis’eness in Romance languages

Utteeaoce in Romaoce is moee emotin’e than in Germanic langaages. Thus a sentence such as ‘Lelieutenant-genetalBaYetlein nefutpaoplict heuteu.c qae 000 camatade Wits
(eefeeeiog eathee hypoctitically, to the casualties of these eespecttn’e ditissoos) could
bethetransclose
lated as ‘Bofayerlaein letter)
had as manyvvith
casualtiesentiment,
s as his col eague Wsand
t ’. Romanceuaggeratr
e languages tend tapologsessuch
o personalize inanimate subjeascts, ch‘jeouso
arge fot-muleodéoolé’
de politeose (eas.g.
melt as geeetings such an ‘oochanté’.

25. The paramnnntny nf the equivalent-effect principle

Werner Kolleet has tightly pointed out that the principle that the translaton should
product the same effect on his own readers as the SL author produced on the oetgunal
readers (first stated, I believe, by P. Court in 1896 and usually referred to an the
principle of similar or equivalent eesponse or rifect, oe, by E. A. Nida, an the
principle of dynamic eqoit’alenct) is bncoming gtneeolly nnpceordinate, both in
translation theoey and practice, to the principles of primacy of form and primacy of
content. The principle of equivalent-effect in the one basic guide-line in translation,
and it is itOnical that it is s little recognized by nchool and unit’eesity teacheen who
tither favour a ‘stylistic’ bias, which produces a high-flown travesty dedicated to the
‘spirit of the original’, or a ‘content bias’ (‘idtas, not wotds’) which reproduces
information, shedding emphasis, espressiveness or persuasiveness, and reduces all
mraning to cognitive meaning. Moreovee Nida, by cooteantiog dynamic only with
formal equivalence, thereby omitting cognitivo equivalence, fails to show the range of
dynamic rquivalrnce’s curious foci (i.e. Schwet-pankte). At the same lime many
students, searching an illusory ‘truth’, favour a formal bias (i.e. dogged adherence to
the SL syntao), oe are con tent with primacy mtanings, usually obtained from
dictionaries, and their versions are evidrnce of frequent interference.
Howevre, the rquivalent response principle is mentalistic and needs further definition.
According to Kollee, the trader refereed to is ‘the normal eeadee who has
average encyclopaedic knowledge” The definition is vague, and even if author and
translator have similar readers in mind, the ‘peagmatic’ factors of register will affect
the style of the translation. IC the readership is different, the TL tent will be further
from the SL lent, and nimilaeity of effect coeeespondingly haedee to achieve. (The
problems are simplified when a tent is weitten tube translated, as in some advertising
and propaganda material, and the SL reader does not enint.) Kollec anks many
questions about the intended effect on lbt second reader, without supplying any
answers. One assumes that if the emphasis 0f the lent in on information, both sets of
readers will be primarily inscrested in its content. Presumably, clarity, simplicity and
orderly arrangement are the qualities eeqaieed foe conveying the information, and are
therefore lbe essential elements in achieving the similac response. If, however, the
text attempts in nome meaoure to persuade or direct the reader, this affective functioo
is likely to dominate the informative function. Wheee there is a nuance of suasion,
encouragement, scandal, optimism, pessimism, determent, etc., the reader is likely to
react more strongly to it than to the information it relates so, whether the latter is
 Theory of translation 133

peeviously known or not. The essential element that most be toansfet ed is t he affectise pensoosive,whichtakesprrcedenCcoventhetnlormot,w often sically Eventf

itcan only be teed between the lines (like the yes/ne tendeocyof an important statement)
net the woeds, which hat to be conveyed.
his, theeefoee, mistaken to maintainlhatthecogmtii’eistheprimaeY andthe aflectiveis

tthe
he secotconnotative
tdaey element in language.seeds
Witness howtoin Froverride
ench, the indicatthe
it’c givendenotative
may to thesubj ooctn’emeaning,
iostatemeotsotonquestandiooedtmetaphor
actthatarecol000edbyliseeliomote
g.SimilatlY
importantthan the physical fact. When one has to make a choice between ‘call the police’t
or’oatlthrconstabte’,thegormerveesionislikelytobemoreemotit’e,wheeeemoto’eness
is reqoired, even though the latter is a mote ‘accoeate’ (cognito’ely) translation.
This escitatory tunction, whethee it appears in commands, roles, instructions,
propaganda, notices, etc. , has, unliketheothertwofonctions, widelydiffeeentsyntacttcal
realizations in European languages. The success ot the translation with a strong
rxcitatonyfunctioncanbecrodely assessedbyisspnacticalrffrctontbencuder(c.g.didhe
buy the product? did hr keep off the gross?) hot this may not be possible. When a
statementhasaperforntatis’efunction, itisoftenwrittnn in lermalaiclanguage, aodthc
effect on the first and second readers is not token into

Similarresponsewbere the fonction isropeessive isdifficult to analyse, since itdcpends

no a unique personal relationship between one originator (with lbe eoception of folk
balladsetc.)andeaeeeader. Onedeeanotkaosrifthereaderisgoiogtobrmostaffected
bythe content (say, insight intosocial conditions), the ethical trothof the test, or aqoality
ofthelanguoge,orthrrhymrsandnhythms. Thrsametrstmaybrrffecsivelytransloted
variously accordingly. Usually, a translation that concentrates only on the content can
hardly achieve similar response, bat it is useful as a stepping stone to the SL test. A
teanslatorwhoaimsatsomethingotherthanproducingasimilarresponsecannotclaimto
be attempting a full translation, but this does not mean that all translations should never
sound like translations. Thus if Ohr SL authos drniatrs widely from the collncatinnal,
lexical, syntactic, metrical, prosodic, semantic norms of his own language, one would
expect the TL test to do lihewise, and to have the flavour of a translation. An English
translatianofThomasMann’sDr. Faunusa(orKrull)shoaldbeconvelotedandpedantic
so that the reader should feel that Serenas Zeitblom could never have been English:
nrvrrtheless,itshouldstillhaveasimilareffectonhimasnntheGermanrrader.Thusthr
main stream of translation theory, which advocates equivalent response, can be
paeadaxicallyreconcilrdwith WalterBenjamin’s°brilhiantway-outview that translation
fills in a gap in the second language, but perhaps only where masterpieces are being
translated. Nomina aamina. The more important the tent, the more literal the
translation.

26. The persuasive function

There is a parallel in the relationship between nbc tent’s persuasive and informative
functson and the translator’s subjective and teutnallevels. The strongeeshe persuasive
134 Approaches to translation

element in the text (unles it ix formulaic) the more the translator is likely to stretch his imagination to exercise his choices, unconscsoutty to let snternal images,
memories of sensr-imptesxion, records of actixit es imbued with le tings suf use his language The translator is at his most cteatixe when he is handling the pe su sts’e
function.

27. The limits sf context

Contest determines meaning, bat, at least in ‘ordinary langaagr’, it does not

determine alt meaning. In the axe at xinglr wacdx, many proper count can be
ttheranslatmonths
ed out of contestand
, in partthe
icular thdays
e namrs ofofcounttheries, week
risers and tourrwns, tusa
hough toallyme of tused
he lat er twino aretheir
duplicatesinglr
d in othr parconcrete
ts of the world. Thesense.
names of
Many technical and scientific terms, particularly if they are compounds in orsgsn (e.g.
tsnntrxt.
elephone), can hrHowever,
translated ‘straight’:aaulnuwhet
nylon, oxygen, aluminium.ofButcompounds
no other category of singl(railway
e word apart fromstation,
the above is trAtbeitnehmet,
anslatable without r ference to
clause lémoin) are monosrmous, and the ratio incrrusrs the larger thr lrsscal unit. A
Iranslalor is nal always justified in demanding to inspect the micra- or mucrocootexl
brlorr hr translates.

28. The degree of choice

How mush choice has a translator? The question may hr approached through
number of genrralizalions:
Thr grrasrr slsr diffrrrnce in grammar and lrxis brlwrrn the SL and TL languages,
lhr grralrr lhr drgree of choicr.
The stronger lhr cognitive or rrprrsrntalionul function, and lhereforr the weaker the
pragmatic function in lhr SL text, she lesser she degree of choicr.
The better one understands she linguistic meaning of a lrxl, the less choice the
translator has in foemnlaling his words; but, the more difficult she linguistic mraning,
she more variations are likely to be available.
The belIer the translator understands the referential meaning, the more easily he can
‘transfer’ it ta language and she larger number og linguistic variations he can use.
Correspondingly, the morn obscure the referential meaning, the more the translator
has to ‘cling’ to the SL words.

In theory, three should hr less choice in she translation ol objects, qualities and
processes or actions shun ol mental concepts. However, the notorious gaps in
language failing to name ordiutingaish between generic and specific terms and cutting
up colours in various ways have been frequently noted. Theoretically, all physical
phenomena should be translatable accurately, as thep are cancerte and in the sensible
world, whilst mentalconcepts should be untrunslatabte, as they are ideal and peculiar
 ThroW of translation 135

tooneindis’idual. Infact, asthephysicalisonlyge0sPedtht00fhthemmntol,tht5tb0rY

is only applicable in the most geeeeat

loose ees’eeoehasbenrsstandardieedrithrr
thepeespectiveandconSidertheqa05ti0nPe0ctY Ateanstaofficially
torshOold base nor cbyhoice asage.
is translating tecAshnicalseas
and insti atasateem
i000l teems ochere ofthe coartr espondenc
has
e
beets eecoeded by as association such as the British Standaeds Institation (BSI), the
Aooociation fr’ancaioe de No,-malioation (AFNOR), the Deatocher Normenaicsochuoo
(accepted.
DNA) and the AmeeicFoethee,
an Standaeds Assoone
ciation (Ahas
SA), or anosy glooptions
s ary 01 ropobe,when
a teanslatorono
meeely cteanslatos
aases harm and confuthe
sion bygeoat
using any teemmal000ty
but the one genetofal y
common obiects and the majority, hot not so laege a one, of actions, peocesses and
qualities, geammatical woods and common collocotsons.

29, When to translate words and not ideas

Normally, one translates ideas, on which the words act as constraints, If ever one is
permitted to translate words, not ideas, it is when the rolerence in nonliterary
translation or lbs sense (Sins) in literary translation is still obscure after all aids have
bern consulted in sam. Anthony Cranet° has pointed out tb rscrptional vcrbal
correspondence in Samuel Bechert’n own translation into English of his nos’el Comrrrr
c’élait, where oh scare langoafe is precisely translated, as though it were denotative. In
normal literary translation, however, the emphasis is on connototion, not denotation.
It is commonly stated that one nhoold trannlatc ideas not words. The concept is
mentalistic, and relates two different ordeos of things, but it is useful as o warning
against takingthe SLwords as their facevalur, against translatinglrom and or into the
primary meanings of words. To be accurate, one translates words that ore used in
contest, that is, words that are lesicallyconditioned andconstrained bycollocation and
connotation, grammatically by syntas, intonationally by word-order, sometimes
phonelically by assonance, alliteration, onomatoporia, and moreover they are
normally rrlerentially bound; one does not normally translato words in isolation, or
assume they are bring used in their prim ary sense, unless they appear randomly. In
imaginative writing, words are usa ally referentially bound, even though the reference
may have symbolical value only (e.g. ‘red’ symbolizing ‘blood’, or ‘death’ in Wilfred
Owen’s poems); non-literary writing is always relerrntially bound, and in a grammatically
and collocationally acceptable sentence such as ‘The King of France is wise’ (the
ordinary language philosopher’s dnlight) thr translator makes no difference between
such afancy and the equivalent fact, but mayhas’e to add a footnote to rvplain that the
king does not esist. Again, when a translator finds a misprint or a neologism that is
referentially clear and indisputable (‘La suearest sfcrftée par len glandes ecaines,’
eccnine glands), he hOs to notr that écaine is not usually found.

30. Reference

For the translator, Bedrurong (refreence) has two interlocked faces: (1) the mental,
which imaginatively and intellectually apprehends the estralingaistic reality, or, in the
136 Approaches to trasslatior

case of concepts where there is no such reality, some kcnd of symbolccaf eqse’aleni,
(‘the
2) the lingirl
guistic, whiiochtheis the sred
implest anddress’
clearest posmight
sible reduchetion (par‘Mary
aphrase or peecReddaway’,
is) of the Sine (sense)whdst
of the test. Thusioinaa oetstory
vspaper reitpormight
t, the refereechee of
symbol of beauty, or mystery, aod soon. Tbeoe000 denotes or defines the refeteoce,
iaflasive
is the lit guisticonstroctdescriptive.
are built over it. RefereReference
oce is osclose to thehasbasic est‘meaning
oafiogoistic nealinity asisolation’
the translator coo(Russell).
gel; it sticks to theWhat
bare fact,wemheeesaysense oris
is sense, svhai ive point to or name is reference. The translator frequently
transfers from sense to reference (the neoteal element), from the domain of the
diciioeaey to that of ihe encyclopaedia, before returning to lbe sense in the rangei
langnage. He most kno’c ‘cho ‘the girl in the red dress’ is before translating.

31, Art os’sdesee

In the most genreaf theory, the teanslaiios of language relating to animate and
inanimate objects, appearances and peecesses in the visible world should bra science,
since the referents are more or less measurable, whilst the translation of language
relating to concepts on colouring physical phenomena affectively, net being measunuhle,
should bean art. This broad theory, like the behaviourism on which it is based,
hue a restricted tenth, but breaks down repeatedly. Ii fails to take into account that
most words, whether they name physical phenomena or not, have an affective
colouring, whilst many concepts, such as life and death, are me re cancerie than
objects; the reality is only rnpeeienced through the mind.
Looking at the question more realistically, one could distingnish art and science in
translation with more assurance by positing that translation isa science where there is
one correct on one objectively superior rendering of award, phrase, clanse, etc., end
an art where there are more than one equ ally (or less than) adequate rendering.
Translation is therefoee demonstrably a science when one is handling terms of art that
have an accepted equivalent and terms where one has to find the nearest possible
equivalent; thus a term such as Mottesfraoonebrosr cannot to my knowledge be found
in a reference book, but the search for an equivalent (mottled or focal on piecemeal
necrosis?) is scientigic, since one is dealing with a demonsirable fact, although the
Gennan author uses as imaginative and unusual metaphor. In general, accepted
equivalents are sacred, and everything else is free (within a narrow cone of choice) to
the translator. Stylistics, cultural and pragmatic colouring, all equivalents that are not
standardized or genre ally accepted—all this comes within the scope of the art of
translation, provided that scientific methods une ased in eliminate all othen possibilities
before tIe moment of choice arrives. It may, however, not be possible to weigh
scientifically the merits of connotation against denotation, emphasis againni lesical
accuracy, over- against nndeetranslatian. Diagrammatically, the science of translation
(viz. the translation of terms of art) may be as shown as follows:
 Theory of trunslatios 137

There is one obligatory transfer from SLterm through common reference to TL term,
and not necessarily any direct cottisection between SLandTL sense (e.g.
toom_mettet’—lh’ebotuhltelato(.

The art of teanslotioe (via, the translation of ‘language’), all eon-standardtaed lcstcal
units and (structures) iv shu’cn us lottoos:

The basic artistic process is the setection between utmost equalty good vartants; this’
in stylistics requiring the translator’s taste, ott and elegance; hts
Vor’ntellung and idiolect are powerfully at tvork. Reference ts no longer required as a
guide-tine.
Needlrss to say, this artisttc process is only the hnal stage to translattng nonstandardiaed
lexical units and grammatical structures. The baste process ts agatn
scientific, the tnanslator by a continuous process of hypothests and ‘centftcatton
through refenence eliminates alt inaccurate variants and reduces solid variants to the
lowest possible number:

32. Literal translation

If a word for word, primary for primary meaning translation has functional
eqnis’atrnce, any othrr translation is wrong. No translation is core too literal or too
close to the originat—the criteria arr irrelevant. ‘Er liebi seine Mutter’ can only be
transtatrd as, ‘He loses his mother’. (Such correspondences are rare and usualty only
found in langue-typr srntrncrs in monroe less old fashioned modrrn language course
testhooks rather than in theparole of ondinany languugr. Thus sentences such as ‘The
cat irs on the mat’ or ‘Das Mfdchen tiebt seine Mutter’ are unacceptable as parole,
where ‘firs’ is replaced by ‘is lying’ and Dat Mddchen by a proper name or pronoun.(
Provided functional equivalence is preserved, any syntactic structure both smaller and
larger than the sent once should be transferred in order, together with the order of its
word components. The better written the sentence, the more important the note
becomes. ‘The proper words in the proper pluces’ (Swift) mast conrespond in the SL
and TL tests, I see no reason foe translating Paul Claudet’s, Do Ia,
qu’orrtpournoualenpeiin tableaux hollandaio,tt otherwise than by: ‘Hence the curious
attraction that small Dutch pictures have for us.’ Anything else is ‘wrong’, unless
perhaps the word ‘hence’ does not come naturally to the translator, and hr is forced to
use ‘Thit shows’ or ‘This is’ instead. Any attempt to translate at trait curieux as
‘peculiar charm’, ‘strange fascination’ etc. (both English collacationt would turn out
differently in retranslation), arising from the bad old school and university instruction
‘Always use a “different”, i.e. noncugnate word’, is not acceptabfe.
138 Approaches tu

In the wider serrse, all translations nnust be as ‘litenal’, i.e. as close to the oeiginal at

possible. In the naetossoe ‘ssoed foe woed’ sense, literal teasslation is osly useful as a peeliminaey technique foe discos’eeing an acceptable translation.
33. The trassslatns”s idinlert

Feos(Abbild)
n his idiolect,ofthe laanfusituation
age of his habitualheuse, wisees
th its penslheoafh
onal pecultaeit ethe
s of franiSLsnae,test.
lenin andHis
word-oedoe,dialect
the teanslatatononce
ceeates hisincidentally
linfuistic nepeoduction
espeesses his own style and chaeactee and eefulates the eatnealuens of his teanstation,
ensuein that i is modern and ful . The effectiseness of the session is hnally dependent on the elefance and sensilisity of the translator’s command of a eich
languafo.

34. Variance

When a passage in the SE tent goes beyond the stafe of abstraction that is neemally
acceptable in the TL, and is not espressive (or ‘espressionistic’ in Herbeet Read’s
sense of ‘espeessinf subjectis’e emotional enpetiences’)ii the iranslaioe inesitably
chanfes the syntas and minimally the lesical content of the oniginol’Lo cuniinuitb
della siabilità oedinania e assicurata do 94 sottovia e 21 cas’alcas’ia’ (‘Teaffic normally
nuns uninteeraptedly osee the whole motoemay, mhich has 94 underpasses and 21
flyovers’).
In the abuse transtation, the link between ‘uninterruptedly’ and ‘nndeepasses’ has
been weakened. If the sentence mccc finer to twenty competent translatues, it is
unlikely that the same tension mould come up twice.
The moee difficult a sentence is linguistically, in its ‘sense’ rather than its ‘refeecnce’,
and the further it is eemosed from its deep structures, the greaten the numben of
translations mill be acceptable. The difficulty may lie in the obscurity, the complrsity
on the degree 0f abstraction of the thought in the sentence. The greatest spectrum of
saniance in translation lies in the communicative, which is also the stylistic element.
Since language systems differ phonologically, grammatically and Insically (although
the degree of difference vunirs from language to language), translation is an
unnatural, artificial and artistic activity, always in varying degenes. Even the dnclancd
insaniance of terms of art is usually artificially standardized, and represents a
refrrrntial net a linguistic equivalence.
Frnm a mentalist’idralittic point of view which takes universals as a basis of thought
and language, variance in translation will be more conspicuous in the grammar than in
the lenin, and in the vocative and to a lester degree, lb respects inn (in the clash
between the SL writrn’s sclf-espeession and the translator’s) aspect of the test rather
than the informative. Thc more remote a surf acr strac turn in a SE testis 1mm its drrp
structure, thr morn diftrrrntly iris likcly to reappear in the TL tent. In fact, esnn the
basic structarn, animatr subjcct—animarc vrrb—inanimatc direct object, may hate to
change in a translation, although it is thc construction least likely to change.
 Thnory of translation 139

Lexmentatty
icatly, the svordperceived.
s most sobject to variaSociocettarat
nce are those espwsstng nuancdifferences
es of feeltng and qaalapaet,
ily (basicalthe
y adjectgreatest
ives and these deeidtveefeeces
vatives so other pants ofarespeechoften
) that are
is tests desceibief sobjective states, where a fanfoafe has some of t s narer and most eso5eriwords.)Withineochrefistetofelanfeafe,thele0stfteqeenslYeslmotd5
are tihrty to be the hardest to roost ate.) Then Refer’s category on Dejrctson has an enormoes stock of overdo (many admit edly obsolescent) very few of which hose
obvioes French or Germ on eqets alters.

39, The ‘socin-caltural’ parole

Neebert has referred to the litsgeistic, siteetional end socioceltenal aspect of transla
tion. Presemably he escledes the subject element Vorotollesg, since he regards
as a science. In my opinion, when the sociocufteral aspect is then
introdsoced it becomes the sebstantive element in the translator’s work, the parole
(Frege’s Sinn, J. R. Firth’s ‘text’) with which hr is primarily coecerned, aed which may
hx ‘reduced’ on the one hand to lunger (aed then to ‘deep strectere’) and on the other
to ‘situation’ (reference).

Then as Itnterpeet Neebert, most portions of a test can be redeced to two basic
parallel ioteepretatioes which maybe of assistance to the translator, althoegh hr does
sot adopt them: the Morning Star is ‘the star (that) shines in the morning’ as well as
‘Venus’. Then a subsidiary estension coeld be made to my translation schema:

Iefa Vm

36. Terms of art again

My deginitton of ‘teems of art’ is slightly widened to inclede all lexical items that have
spectalszed ese on a siteation connected with a ncieotific, urtistic or technological
process or wtth a professional activity of any hind; it includes all jargon. Terms of art must be translated by the appropriate teem in the TL provided they are used as terms
140 Approaches to translatior

of art. If howeser they accused figuratisely, on in a mont general say (many teems of
art, e.g. ‘input’, ‘knoss-hoss’, etc., pass quickly into ordinary language) they become
non-standardized language, and may be sartously translated, e.g. ‘La psychtatrte
secrete one untipsychiatne, Ia gynecologie one anttgynecotogto dont los sources
soci(‘are
opolitiquesnotnot latx’ariuncr
a memo nappo phrzatiqwith
ae’ (‘producedthe. . .law’)
the same undeetying causes’); ‘Los aides publiques non t pan on caracteer cnor’bitant do d,-ori commun

37, The occasion fos’atranststtinst

Neubort (1968) has slightly confused occasions with methods of translation. One and
the same test, whatexer its oetgiral purpose, may be translated (a) with its oeigtnal
purpose retatned, i.e. as self.espeession or to inform, persuade or direct the
target-language reader; (b) to explain itsellto the target reader; (c) for a new group of
readers, laymen, children, opponents, special audiences foraparticularoccasion, etc.;
(d) a goneratinn or mote later; (e) to illustrate the mechanics of the SL. For each of
these occasions, the test will be translated differently and the intention of the original
must still be elucidated.

38. Unit of translation

Tbe concept ‘unit of translation’ (UT) normally refers to the sourer-language unit
which can berectrated in the target language without addition of other meaning
elements front the source language. Ideally, the UT is one word, hence ‘literal’ is
often equated with the troth. Howecer, as a concrpt the UT hardly assists the
translator, since as soon as he meets any difficulty he is expanding it, or, if he begins
by translating ideas rather than words, he continuously contracts it.

39. Ideal translation

‘Teanstaliog a poem, if its ceeator iso craftsman, is like rrscoriog a piece of music foe a
driferent set of instruments or a different kind 0f musical ensemble’ (Smith, 1978).
Does this underrate the difficulties’ A translation can no more be definitise than the
rntrrpretation 0g a piece of music, or a solo performancr in an orchestral work. The
concept 0g tim ‘ideal translation’ (JIger, 1975) is unreal. Translation is an ‘endless’
procedure, eserpt in the case of ‘performatise’ statrments. Other translations can
net’er be finishrd, only laid asidr. They car always be rmprosed. And, for any
trogursrically difficult passage, there ace otten neerrat equally good (ifin some respect
inadequate) solutiorn. Moezocee, nince it is assumed that the TL reader is alice, a
translatron is written rr the modern language and therefore there is a case for recising
ecery 30 yrans. Whrlst the canons of Classical (thrrrfarr ‘ideal’) ort may gosern
some translations, others arr as closr to Romantic or Surrealist intuitions as thrir
nrigtnals.
 Theory of macstation 141

40. Aesthetic function

The poetic or aesthetic function is centred in the sound effect of tunfuafe, rnclodsnf
metre, repetition and euphony. Where it is the dominant functton the sense becomes ireetesant; the teanstator wit therefore gnoee the sense, as sn esamples and
catch-phrases ton phonetics (‘the ruin in Spain’) on sn teunstatrnf some of Chrssttan
Morfeestern’s poems.
At other times, the function is combined with the espressn’e and rnlormattonul

tunctions, us in Jukobson’n (1960) exumpte t’uf r’eua Alfred, ocheee ‘tr fhtful Alfred’ would hr tuprrion to ‘odious Alfred’ usa trunstution purely foe reasons of rqussatrnt
sound effect.

The aesthetic function is essential in poetry whether its combtned wsth the espeessor
function (lyrical poetry of the first person), the intormatue (narrator poetry ot the
third person), or the rocatise or transactional (deamutre poetry of the second person).
rcases where the poetic function plays a minor puet, the translator may hose to
foote it. As it is centred in the SL, toss of nneuninf is usually considerable! Any
translution of a phrase such as’t like tke’ will requite infenuity, butt would normally
beteansfereed.

41. The central concern of translation theory

The central concern of teunslution theory is to determine un uppropniule method of

42. Own language mastery comet first

A translator has to know his own lungauge, his subject and the target lunguufe—in
thur order. Excellence in the first requirement oft en oases him from hideous mistakes
in the second and the third.

43. Pendulum swing in translation style

Fifty years ugo, teunsturions were muinly too stiff und bogus-lilerury (see Knos, 1957(.
Now, translations are mainly too colloquial and ton emotise.

44. The espanding process

As with translation problems so with the translation. A translator may start with the
ntardurd ‘micro-procedures: transcriptions, literal translations, translation labels,
loan-translations, transpositions, modulations (see Vinay ard Darbelnet, l976(,
comporerrial analyser (to fill in lexical fops), etc., processes subject first to
syntactical constraints and lexical systems. Bat then ax he resiews the seutroses, the
paragraph and the text, and becomes lets word-baand, clause-bound, sentencebound,
cern thoaghtbound, he closes always more narrowly on his intention, which
142 Approaches tO translation

isethronratioeh meanigoftheauthor toprducepres tyherquired fectonherudet.Notehat er com unicatseandsemanticranslt onctn de.Es-eni Gouadrc’s(1974)itlusration:‘Thecalmsuprem asonaceofher yesfinalyrepledhisfear’,‘Laprofndesérnited sonrefadlieuparchasners-
eeaintrs’—a ctichified translation of a clichihed nenlence by 1-I. E. Bates—some

eviboth
dence ofcontestually
this eccentric, centrifufal indicated,
mos’ement away fromcan
finie parhe(syntaseen
ettc constraThus
int—ir i’ iadrfinally,
) ienaedtar osiwith
te (calm assura few
ance) and‘strokes’,
er-emcee, both opttheional,
translator may go beyond all the findings of contrustise linguistics, the Spracherspaar.
Starting with the wend, he may moon through the ‘ranks’ (Halliday, 1961) of the
grammatical units to the final los-el of discourse or rhetoric, the ‘personal use made by the writer of the opportunities offered him by a language-system’ (Gouadec, 1974).
45. The right tree cad of traastatioa
Thr must exciting kind of translation is where it is consciously inteeprelution,
hrrmenrutics, exegesis. Where the test is obscure, and so remote in time and space
and learning that the language goes beyond metaphor to symbolism, the translator has
to interpret substantially, unless he isle lease the tusk to his readers. In a case such as
Congucius’ ‘Within the four seas, all men are brothers’ (Wrifhl, 1976), the test
requires both historical and intuitive interpretation. One does not know what ihe
‘four seat’ are, the social status of ‘men’ (gentlemen?) nor the precise metaphorical
s-aloe of ‘brothers’. The same criticism has been made of Pericles, whose democracy
peubably consisted of ‘pure’ Athenians only and excluded s-las-cs and Spuetuns.
Further, the cummenls of some sinologists feud one rethink that Chinese communists’
literal and physical interpretation of Marxism on a personal as well as political Irs-el
(‘self’coltisation’) way has-e eoctcibuted to the reorirsturion that has become so
opposed so Sus-irn bueraucratism (the idea, not the bareauvnacy).
The responsibility of trues-tutors foe inuerperialions of the boehs ihat base influenced
world history, and hair often constituted ihr foundation of intellectual hefemuny in
s-aeious cultures, has been feral and usually neither acknowledfrd roe examined.
Translation Oheoey may now help to make them conscious of his responsibility.
Lfvi-Ssrauss (1974) maintains thai poetry and myth are at opposime ends of russIalion;
poetry can only be translated with many kinds 0f distortions, whereas the s-alue
of the myth persists es-en in the worst translation. The substance of myth is neither in
the style nor the manner of narration nor the synlus. but in the story (l’hiuioire); myth
is language (langage) but lanfuage working at a s-cry high Irs-el, abuse the linguistic
basis it started from (like a plane lukinf off from its runway). There is a rough truth
here. Poetry is subject so distortions, not always as many as LeviSleuuss suggests. If
myth can be seer only as action, or behaviour (hietcire), ibm ii is less at the
translator’s mercy than a descriptive teat. If myths are asiversul, partly independent
of period and place, they should be less- liable to misieieeprotauioe after their initial
translation. However. Lesi-Strauss appears to pot myths beyond languafe (while
denying it), and even the degree of literalness or figurativeness 0f elements of myth
may has-r tube at least partly assessed by linguistic analysis, viz, translation.
 Theory of rtartsletion 143

46. The iedeter’reinacy of tr’aoshetioe

In principle, translation can contey facts (starting from proper names, figures
cBut
yphers esen
and physicathis
l objectsss), ordassuming
ers. tnstrucisons, questhatt ons anda’e‘mesare
sages’ dealing
pen’ feetly. Its ren’iih
ndering ofexplicit.
descriptions, fenon-aotbsgueuset’en
elings, mental atti udes is usually imperfect.if
polysemous SL tests.
In the sentence ‘The cat sot on the mat’. the ceard ‘mat’ is semantically anderdetet’
mined for translation pueposes into sen’eral foreign languages, although in English it
maybe perfectly adeqoale. deperdingon its intention and t scontest. Similarly in the title of an article I a folio don mi’dicarnrnlt, Ia folio as ‘craze’ or ‘fel s mould make
equally good sense, and the ‘cond is again insufficiently determined In general, the
farther a icoed is from the centre of the SL situational or lsngassisc contest (perhaps in
parenthesis, anon item so an aitceo idinated list, as part ofa title). the less semantically
determined ii is and the more the translator then has to ‘inierpret’, on ihe basis either
of the probability of the situation descnibnd on of his understanding of the SL authet’s

The preceding paragraph represents my attempt to make sense oat of at any rate pant
of Quinn’s onions Ous coninihuticos to translation theory (1959. 1960). Qaine maker
seceral points in facourof the ‘indeterminacy’ on translation, he suggests that at least
‘radical’ translation into an anscnspted language mx impossible. chile translation
brim err eufrurallyclose languages such as Fnisian or Hungarian into English is mere
‘intracultural serbalism’ rather than translation.

But or the main issue, the gap botoceen inadequate analyiical hypotheses on ichich the
translation of sentences depends. hr is pathetically short of enamples ‘gasagai’ and
‘neutrinos lack mass’ base become famous ibtoagh ihnir singoloniiy

Quine conceals his scepticism about translation snub a certain mit and urbanity.
When he states that ‘For translation theory. banal mcsiaecs one the broth of life’, he
is marring the rrannlator so he suspicious of thc absurd and the esotic. In a leo
contests. ibis is salutary: it is he scccrily that tests in she Iranslator’s cliche Again.
Quinn’s reference to ‘free.floaring. lingoislicallyncarrul mnunsng’ (a hini ofdecentned
or logical or deep siracrure( suggests that inside the (uorld.famous( philosopher.
three is some kind 0g a trarslation-rheorist Bat again, mhnn he states that ‘ice’ can.
but ‘the ounce’ cannot. capture ibis meaning. iris not surprising that this behaciounist
and slase to the Whonfian hypoihcsss despairs of translation.

I must stress ihar the reasonn by iris nor piissi bIn to translate ‘the cat sat on the mar’
adequately into, say, Ftench or German (apart from the formal aspecr of the
seoteree, the rhymes and the monossflablcsl scoot brcaosrof the ‘indeterminacy’ of
as such, bui because of the lack if cpecifsc infi’nmarsor in the English
or generic ierms in the foreign language. If the missing informalion is
supplied, ihr translation in Game’ S sense at leasi mill be adequate, and there should
hr lbe cottrsndrncr in inuik-sulors brrssrrn nhr SL and TL trsi, ‘rmhich, hr claims, is
so ogler missing.
144 Approaches to tratoslatior

However, where the SL text ts umbigaoas at togae (see Kessspson, t977) tn face

(1) reference, e.g. toe ‘hatt’—’is it a tulle or a ceattbale’?;

(2) uense, e.g. ‘htx book—the text tails to specify the entatton between ‘hts’ aod
‘hook’ (quit a ecr’it, qa’il a achete’);
(3) lack of lexical opectfication, e.g. ‘neighboue’—mate or temate?; ‘go—on toot, by
teaio, by plane?; etc.,
(4) dtajonctton—with two equally posxibte inteepretalive postibsltlsco (e.g. ‘the appticasts
had either a degree or teachtngespertence’),
the translator has to guess or tnteepnet, and assets hts degree ol accuracy to an .tppondod
statement.

Qoino an the other hand is questioning not so much the determtnacy as the
possibility of translation on alt occasions except where the SL test ts ‘phystcally’
stimotated, a thesis which has been enfated by Dummetl (197f( in a more convinctng
argument than any Icould par forward.

47. The trans)atiae pi’erertrs

There are three basic translation processes;

(a) the interpretation and analysis of the SL test;

(b( the translation procedures, which may be direct, or on the basis of SL and TL
corresponding syntactic structures, or through an underlying logical ‘inrenlangaage’
(the teroiam comparationis);
(c) she reformulation of the test in relation to the writer’s intention, the readers’
espectarion, the appropriate norms of the TL, etc.
The processes are to a small degree paralleled by translation as a science, a sktll and
Techniques

48. Eqtsir’alent frequency ttf usage

The principle of eqae’alent frequency of usage in souece and target fangaage applied
to gnamtttatioal structanes and tents in particularly nsnlal an an additional method of
senifying a translation. Than to translate ‘he baked’ an es bak usoald be ear of time and
oar of plate (only a pedant mould use the Geeman phease) and to translate ‘Ich babe
keine Ahnung’ as ‘I hate no premonition’ nontd gise Ahnang too much patticalatity.
Bath trarnlationt tiolate the generat principles of equal generality, foemality and
alfectisity, as melt as equitalent treqaency of usage. Whilst semantic equitalence is
the only basto principle of transfatton, it ran only estst if there ts the masimam
equisalettce of form and frequency in usage.

49. Words outside their normal contests

A mard that is dis’orced team all its usual collocations and appears to be being used
ertirelyout otcenteut thould be peesumed to be applied in itt mentcommoe or
peimary sense; in particular, if it is used as an item in a list of objects, or as an
illustration. Thus in Aragon’s Leo filas riles russo, drliranti must be ‘delicious’ in Aus
célos ddlit’antt ass canons iroeiquee. Again, in the sentence ‘Medecin-alibi,
mrdrcin-dtage, mrdrcin-tetiche, cr51 cc que rrchrrchrnt parfait nombre de parents
aan prises asrc no entant dtfficsle’, dtage, being oat of contest, must be applied in its
prim ary srnsr of ‘hostage’. (‘Many parents struggling with a difficult child want to use
thnsr darters as air alibi, a kostagc or a tcissh.’(
When a ward has ore main physical and one main figuratise mraoing, the physical or
emotional nature of its collocate, howeter unusual, mill gite a clue to lbe sense
interded. ‘Green ideas’ are not likely to hate any colour, butts hr unformed, ill may
interpret Chomnky’s notorious ‘Colourless green ideas sleep furiously’ in a way that
man not intended.

50. The back-translation test

Asossrce language word should nut be translated into atarget larguage word which
has another obnious nor-to-one equisalent is the soarce language. Usually. geochmrsdig
should nor hr translated an ‘soft’ becaune ‘soft’ is ueich. Well established
collocations (weich sisoen = ‘sit comfortably’) are the esceptson to this rule.
To translatr acec menure in ‘II dit asec mrsurr Irs choses Irs plus tortes’, it may hr
adsssable to splst mesure Into its semantic components as ‘with measured restraint’, as
146 Approaches to translation

‘moderation’ mould be moderation, ‘restraint’ s’elenne, ‘eeserve’ séoes’i’e, etc. The third

reader, i.e. the translation critic, it alst’ays retitled to reject any part of that he considers to be too free, however elefant, if he himself coo turn it back closely
and elegantly into lbo source lonfoafe, and show a substantial discrepancy with the
original text.

Thrmould
ee may bebereasonsclomsy,
for not splitliand
nf a svorthed into itrhythm
s semantic component s svhes translariog. In ‘I na pus Ic sons do Ia mesure’, asy collocation to translale menace
of the sent ence requires a one-to-one equis’alence
such as ‘he has no sense of restraint’. However, the buck-translation lest, though
useful, is never decisive.

51, Translating as

Where the target language hasanumbee of xyoooymx to repress lbe sense of a source
language svord, the translator should choose the word he considers stylistically most
fitting (congruent, adéqual) rather than the word that most obviously translates the
source language word. Thus in the sentence, ‘Le curillelle élail achevér,’ achecée may
be translated as ‘over’ since French has no particular other word to render ‘over’,
although achecée might more obviously be translated as ‘ended’, ‘concluded’,
‘finished’, ‘completed’, nc. II is the hallmark of a good translation louse resources of
mis and grammar (e.g. English veeb-nounn, German FoemwOrter like ouch, halt,
eben, ma)) which are not available in lbe source language, and it is the mark of a
specious, inaccurate translation to use them where they are unnecessary. A bad
translator will do anything to avoid translating word for word; a good translator
abandons a literal version only when it ix plainly inexact. The unil of translation
cannot be generally determined, but it is always the smallest segment of the original
which provides an acceptable equivalent to a segment of the target language test.
Nrvrrthelrss, a translation frequently oporatrs in the lesicol and grommalicul
interstices of lbr source language.

52, Natienal characterislics?

Certain conceptual terms in each language notoriously remain untranslated: ‘standing’,

‘fairness’, ‘humour’, nympathique, Gemfdichkeil, madana, eopsil, démaeche, etc.
When they are likely to be understood by lbe receptor and are genre ally accepted,
the ycan remain, but it is no business of the translator to add to their number:
probably, cerlainly if one accepts the universality of the human spirit, they are all
evidence of some translator’s iocompelrnce.

53. Stress and meaning

Where the lranslator has a problem involving a clash between stress (indicated in the
word order) and lexical accuracy, he normally prefers lexical 0000rocy. But the stress
can always be preserved ig a nan-animate subject governs an animate verb (which is
deleted), e.g. ‘Sa sante ur lui permet aucun rxcès’, ‘Owing to his health he must not
 Tenftsiqaes 147

overstrain himself, or if an active verb can be consorted into a passive, with the same
lexical meaning: e g. ‘A l’opeimionte d’O’Connos’ cos’t’enposdao le petsimiame do
Rommel’,’t ‘O’Connor’s optimism was matched by Rommef’s pessimism.

54, When and mhen nut to repeat a word

A lexical item repeated in the same or she following sentence of the source language
j tent mast be correspondingly repeated in the target language text, unless the original
isentence,
s poorly or loosely wr‘Die
it en. It teagrndr
should not be renderDrandlage
ed the second timedee
by a synonym or a ‘kenning’ (peeiphrasticespression axed to replace a simple name). Than in the
kommunalen Selbstveewaltung ist die islessis’e
Mitwirkung der Burgerschaft and dee von den Burgers grwuhlten Gemeindevee
tertrean den Grschicken dee Gemeisde’, Gemrixde mast be referred to twice,
perhaps as, ‘Tbe esseotint basis of local snll.government is intimate co-operation in
she life of the Grmeixde, the unit of local government, between the citizens and its
eepeesentatives, who are elected by the citizens.’
Cunversety the translator is entitled to replace referential synonyms (‘the Iron Duke’,
‘the Iron Chancellor’, Ic vaixqueus’ de Sidi-Bas-t-axi, 1€ galast commandant de
f’Aft-ika’kot-ps, etc.) by proper names, if the information given is superfluous and the
writing is undistinguished; much other writing is titled with less obtrusive redundancies
and synonyms, nut so mention passages where species and genera stand in
haphazardly foe each other in a pseudo-elegant attempt to avoid repetition (or, at
best, undue emphasis), and isis up to she teasstatnr ta detect these.

55, Cultural allusions in non-’espressive’ tests

A translator should not reproduce allusions, in particular if they are peculiar to the
snarer language culture, which his readers are unlikely In understand. If the allusions
are peripheral to the text, they should be omitted. Fur example, in a popular history
utthr Secund World War, describing Rommel, ‘It n’avail rico de ceo munches a saber
que ruittuil Ssrndhat, et let ce hems de Plutaeque, avail appris a coudee Ia peau du
renued a Ia bison du lios’,it might be translated as ‘He was no trigger-happy brute,
and had learned to combine cunning with strength’.

56. Alternative terms

When a source language text has alternative terms foe an object, and the target
language onty one teens, the translator nurmatly uses the one term only. If, however,
one of the two sourcelanguage teems has a special interest, being technical, archaic or
particularly ‘transparent’ in its descriptiveness, the translator should take some
account olts, usually by reproducing it, in brackets in the text, or in the notes with an
esplanation. Foe example: ‘Darers Festigungskunde umfasst “Meinungeo”, d.b.
technische Methnden, nor BasIn (Schutte) eu bauen and den Plan eines Sperrfortn
(Klause) en entwerfen.’ib The test makes further references to Schanen and Kfausea,
alternating them with Baoteien and Spes-rfnrte respectively.
148 Appruanhrs to

The translator may disregard Meincttgen, schich ts quoted from Durer’s ‘Treatise on
fortifications’, but to bo helpful so his reader, supposedly ao informed student of
Dittos, ho should porhaps pus Schune in brackets after ‘bustion’ and Klau,re sn
brackots often ‘blockhouse’ to translate Basiei and Spettfot’t respectine ly, ulso
enplaining the urchuisms in a note.

57. Titles

A title in best loft untranslated until the rent of the assignment is completed.
Information or figuration titles can then be checked ugasnnt she sum of she content.

Enen a plain title such as Lapt’écenlion: de l’école au lieu de t ’acad may then be better adjusted as ‘Precentine medicine at school und work’. English rsrles tend robe shorter
than others.

58, Atmostemptyssneds
Mont languuges huce some lesical and geammatical fraturen of Ion semantsc content
which may Itane no equicalents in the target language; there is often no need for the
translator so take account of them. Thus Frrnch has expressions chatniètes such an
toutefeis, or’, quoi quit en soit, néattrnoin.t; incises such asconclcait-il, and thr
etoffement uf the serb (e.g. dresser’ un plan). German has its Fulln’or’tet on Flickn’dt’tet
(dach, eben, ja, n’ohl, etc.) and konnre. English has ‘can’ plus the cerbs of the senses,
and its unique ‘aperarirg’ serbs (do, bane, put, go, get, come, keep, let, make, take,
be, etc.), the brilliant discosesy in C. K. Ggder’n Basic English.

59. Quotations

When a quotation from another source (speech, book, etc.) is included in the source
language test, it should normally be rendered mere literally than the rest of the tent.
The teanslatnr is net responsible for its ‘functional equinatrncr’, sincr isis not
addressed In the reader af the target language tent. It is its nwn ‘authority’, and the
translatne mast take no liberties with its formal elements. The translation should be
easily identified when compared with the original quntarion; possibly the greater the
authaniry, the eIsner the translation.

60, The text and the notes

If ann is translating impartant infoemarian which is likely tn puezle the penpased

reader, it in better In weite the background into the test to make it meaningfal eathee
than ass nate, The translator assumes that the fiest reader is better infas’sned than the
secand and the informatian saccinct enough ta be inserted unabtensinely.
Thus tn apaputarhisrory af the Second World War, the name ‘Mihailonich’ istikely to
mran nathing so the reader in 1979. It cauld perhaps be espanded to ‘Geneeal
Mslhatlanich, the Yngoslan eoyalist partisan leader’, Anathee teanslatoe might sabstitune
‘fascist’ far ‘enyalisr partisan’, but this wauld be ematin’e and canfusing escept in
 Techniques 149

somemaroistgroaps. Again ‘renstance’ mightbnbettenunderstoodtltan ‘partisan’. The

Fnciland (1975) has pointed out that this recommendation can be abased by the
ascaxan ybyanyoon. mhernmaintyregenringtononspectal1eedlttetuee
Notessndglossanies rs5eOtiat(peeteeabtyattheendofthebookratheethan0tthetd
ot the chapter on at the bottom ot the page), it they are to the original.

61. The possible redundancy of SE metalanguage

It is easy enoagh, when one is mocking mainty on the tenet of reference, otthe matenial
wortd, of tenmmology and ts standand collocations, to gonget that langaagr and its
ambiguities aeotos’olced atall, totranslatealmottone’to-onostraightforoandsentencrs
sach as, Insaline, electeochoc, neuroleptiqaes out saccessivement gaert Irs boaffees
delinantes, et edo d’aatant pbs tacilemnot qu’elles soot spoulaoement .anablcs pan
detinition,’ withoat noticing that if boaffee is (correctly) translated as ‘outbarst’ or
‘attack’,the phrasepat’definition becomes redusdantin English, as the metaphor isnot
transferred.

62. Third language proper sus

Whrn thr SL text mentionsa non-SL surname, the translator should aissays check it. Le
reaction eoogenede Bonhoefet’(nic) reads saspicioasly. The reference is to Bonhoeffer,
the eminent psychiatrist, the father of the hero Dietnich.

63. Deletion

Theoretically, thetraoslatorhastoaccounttoreceryportionandaspectofcogmtiveand
pragmaticsense intheSLtext. Infact,heisjustihedinpeuningoreliminatingeedundancy
is poorly written informational tests, in particular jargon, provided it is not used for
emphasis. Hrmaysomrtimesredueea’fillnr’neeb(e.g.do,take,pay,effect,etc.)plasits
deverbal noon to its basic serb, wherr the diffrococo in meaning ix inappreciable; ‘La
decomposition dr ces matières orgaoiqnes so fail sons l’action des bactenies saprophytes’;’Sochorganiemalteemaybedecomposedbysaprophyticbacteria’.
Obs’iouslythisis
subeditor’s work which is oftrs door within one language. Moreover there are othrn
stoekconstractions(adjectisalclauses andpaslpanticipleswhrresheverbissrmantically
weak)wherelheverbcanagainbedelesedinsranslation(Lamainonuitaéeaur’laeolhne, Ia
maisonqsaioedreaoeeurlacolhne, faplaineo’étendantdes’antnau.r, oscrayondrotineaeon
stage, etc.). Lastly, itissomelimesnecessarytndeletetheenclitics (Flickn’or’ter’)asedas
connectingwords In mack cnntinuatinnorslightconlrass at the beginoingof a sentence in
some languages, notably German (doch, iibei’haupt, eben, allei’dingo, pure (It.)).

64. The test sr’riter’s idiolert

In a mainly informational lest, it is legitimate to ignore the writer’s repeated idiolectal

pecultanties; ‘La contagion interhotnaine n’esisle pan davantage’ (‘Furthermore, the
150 Apprnachns to

disease does not spread from person to person’). ‘La contagion n’a pat rile davantage signaler a l’écolr qar l’enfanl a continaé de feeqaenterpendant Irs trois semaines qui
prCcCdeeent saconsultation’ (‘Morros’er, the disease was not reported at the school
which the child still attended dating the three weeks before hr saw a doctor’). The
wterases dacantage merely to emphasior his points or make slight contrasts.

65,Tnrsnsnfas’tsas’iastts

Terms of art are asu ally the invariant element in translation, bat within a langaagr
they may have several variants. tllnesses, for instance, occasionally have three: the
layman’s, the doctor’s, and the specialist’s classical term e.g. ringworm, tinea, eeteu
eiecietaia; batteefly-sore, localioed rash, lupus eeyihematoous). The terms shoald
nortnally be matched in each language, assaming say that an article in a British
medical journal is to be translated toe a corresponding foreign journal. However, the
general English preference for less formal trems and simpler syntan and the English
professional man’s relative ignorance of philosophical terms mast be respected: thas
pride malodoeanio are ‘smelly fort’; wakeoukopioshe Diofooae, ‘clinical diagousis’.

66, Similesand images

Any simile, image or comparison shoald asually be as familiar to the TL as to the SL
reader. Sometimes this requires adjustment: ‘La chlorate dAt n’agit que pendant Ic
temps dun hal ou dun contours.’ ‘Aluminium chloride is only effective (as
deodorant) for a short period, say that of a public dunce or examination.’ I am
assuming that the two local referents are more common in France than in England.

67. Tone

The tone of a passage is the key to its communicative effectiveness, and has to be
determined by the translator. Tentativeness, urgency, menace, Outteey, persuasiveness
all have cerlain markers which are more apparent in the syntau than the lexis,
and may be ee0ected in the tense, mood and voice of a few significant verbs. ‘Dica’
says a Roman shopkeeper, meaning ‘Can I serve you?’. Other markers may be
emotire words, or absurdly unreal refereoces: e.g. ‘If you don’t get this right, I’ll push
your head into the radiator!’ Tone is not necessarily mysterious; for R. Husanli it
appears to consist of ‘high level semantic components’. For the translator it requires a
considerable acquaintance with modern stylistic analysis. Otherwise ho will not be
competent to translate, say, the self-doubt of Kafka’s subjunctives. Syntax, which isa
more generalized and absteact measure of language than lexis, gives the feeling-tone

68, Referring
One assumes that a translator looks up any word about whose meaning, in the
context, hr may have the slightest doubt; that any reference lou bilingual dictionary ix
 Tenhniqaes 151

only preliminary to a check in two or three monolingual dtctionarieu, which indicate

(a) mod em us age, (b) appropriate register, (c) orange of collocattonn, (d) degree of
fnequency, formality, emotivrness, genrrality, intensity and approval in all appropriate
wordu. He has to be carefol with any type of cognate, false or true, which hr has

notditlereut
prrviously mrt, note
particolartyofif itsfrequency
apparent/transpurent meani ng makes good senne in the contest—it may even have the name mrantng as its TL ‘equivalent’, but a
(e.g. pnéornee, eonirotatae’c, n’éalnté, hommagc,
phenomènr, eloinn’oyani, bride). In chooning from a colloquial, a professional, and an
academic term for the same phrnomrnon (e.g. measles, rubeola/morbillt(, he has to
consider mainly the standard register in the equivalent TL contest, occasionally
weighing a wayward use in the SL irni and even the advantages of ‘elegant variation’
in hit own version. If there in no ‘professional’ equivalent he may have to use the
‘academic term’, which is likely to be an internationalism. Thus if a ‘painted lady’ (a
buttergy( does oat mist in the TL, he hon to use the learned term Vanrona mandui
(which is in Webstee(.

Further, in invrstigating proper nouns and terms of art, he will look particuborly at thr
type of reference book between the dictionary and lbe encyclopardta, which drfines
concepin and procedures, and which pays as much ottention to the connotations as the
denotation of all pro per nouns (e.g. Antaeun, Parthian, Warsaw, 8th Army).
Lesicogrupheru are at lost rrolioing that all well-known peoper nouns should be in the
dictionary and are part of the language because of their connotations, which are
linguistic.

Finally, lb err are cain even iu translating ‘standardized’ language where one term is
only marginally-minimalty preferable to another (détrrteun/indiratrut/trntrun, sensor!
indicator/detector/sensing devicr!(; these translations are for from interchangeable in
every con trot but in tome contesin, after all the criteria of frequeuey, formality and
irannparency have been applied, the choice 0f the one or the other makes as near as
no difference, and becomes a matter of ‘elrgant variation’. Even in medical
translation, the trader may occasionally like a rest from nuch terms as ‘tracheobronchial
bifurcation’, ‘where the trachea divides to form the bronchi(.

69. Pnnper nanirn hi unnnnnunimatinr ti’annlntinn

Where propen names are mated purely connotatively, e.g. ‘Hr is a Croesus’, ‘She is
Niobe’, the proper name is nonmolly translated by its connotation, unless it also has
the name uruse in the TL. The proper name should be cowponeotially aoalytcd, in its
contest, and may require two on three ‘senses’ in the translation. (Midat: (a( wealthy,
(b( increasing his wealth, (c( unable to enjoy his wealth, etc.(. In semantic translation,
Ibm teansfermed proper name is mandatory.

70. Lengthy tittmn

Tb eve con some times be nicely teansbated by making them into double titlen and
resets tug the order of words, e.g. foe Contn’ibuto ananomo—chirungico oulleponnibilind
152 Apprnaehes to translation

limiti della cagotomIa sottodsafr’arrtetatica nella teeapla dell’uloe’a duodestale put

‘Advantages and limitations of sabdiaphragmatic vagotomy so the treatment of
duodenal ulcers; an anatomical and surgical approach’.

71. SynonymoUs adjectires in

Synonymous adjectives in collocation often become cltchés which are better trans
fated by adereb plot adjective. Thus: ht and proper, beoondero aetgehvacht; neat and tidy, ordentlich angecogen; dreadful and awful, duosetotnchreckltch. When they do
not become clichés, they should be dssttngatsfsed.

72. Unfansitiaeoorunynss

A fraeslatoe can approach an unfamiliar acronym, as in ‘Trattuta con ESK, Ia poeirnte

avrebbe at’uto an teausitorio miglioramento’, in two ways: (1) by searching in
dictionaries of abbreviations, pharmacopociar (in Merck eta drugs beginning wok
ESK wern found, but these worn all types of prnicillin(; (2( by considerjng contest urd
probability. This being a mental case-history, ECT appeared the most likely solution.
The usual Italian term was then found to ho ‘eletteoshock’.

A translator normally is not entitled to create TL acronyms, and should concert any
ad hoc SL acronyms into TL words.

73, The shift of scale

‘A genoitte translator would hose to grope for a set of words no more usespected in
his English contest thus Sterling’s is in its French tradition.’ Thus Gombnich (1978),
whoteensayt in art interpretation, together with the works of Panofsky (1970), Wind,
Wittkowrr, SaxI, Eheenzwrig, Male and, for music, Cooke (1959) are, apart from
bring superb, a frequent stimulus to rrgrction on translation. Gombrich is criticieleg
‘the sonorous pathos of Delacrois’s lobsters and the crepusculot ostentation of
Courbet’s apples’ usa translation of ‘lepathoooortor’e ou ct’e’pcscalaise des hontas’de de
Delactoi.e ce deo peersmeo do Coaches’. He points out that the ntyle of French art
criticism itself has a pathos nonoce osi cr’épusculait’e which requiem a ‘shift of scale’
towards the English lose of undrnstutemrnt, and suggests that some words like
‘theatrical gloom’ or ‘sombre rhetoric’ (hr does nor decide which) ‘would lie
sufficiently near the estreme beyond which the sublime tumbles over into the
ridiculous’; all this is contrasted with the ohnence of such melodramatic effects in
Goya’s still life.
My first comment here is that Gombrich rightly churacterices the above-qcoted
English translation as inept: ‘ostentation’ is inverted, pathos in Feench is ascally
pelseative, and ccépcocclaice has a far mote pronounced figurative sense both of
darkoese and declioe than in English. Secondly, whilrt ‘ehetoeic’ gets somewhere near
pathea, and ‘gloom’ is acceptable for cs’épusculais’e, sonore is hardly covered by
Gombetch. In my opinion, if the passage, which is after all critical and satirical, had
 Tnehriquns 153

be nwritenbyClaudelorValeryinsteadofCharlesSterling.aFrenchonto,andhadther fore flectedtheird ’ida lityaf nimpaetantsnore ratherhart hetradrtonalstyleolFrenchartcritcism,semantictranslations ouldhalebe nmandatory,and
5hifrofscale’demardedbyGambeicltletteadtcal tsaggent’thetonoroator
marky theatricality’. (Gombrich’s paragraph here shoald be regarded as a bean
clannicua of translatron theory.)

74. Nrrtfrtond

it a non-liteeary translator tails to find a SL mord te any lrterataee, he usaalty )a)

translates in line with rho contest, and (b) states n’hat he has done and tn hrs
estimation the degree of likelihood that his translation is correct. Bat )b) snot always
necennary foe an unfamiliarly or newly compounded word. if tn a drcrroeary or
encyclopaedia one beds a word where one is referred to a second word for Its
definition, one normally assamen that lb e second word in more common, and
therefore anes it rather than the first word in a translation. Than ‘tubercafar analysis,
tubencutaus patient’ not ‘tabeecaloas analysis, tubercular patient’, although the two
wards are occasionally interchangeable. Similarly, ‘lymphocytic leakaemia’, not
‘lymphatic leukaemia’.

75. Entesinn of enprennino

Romance language pant paeticiptes and neae.past participles such as inoomptet,

impar’fait sometimes hose to carry more meaning than they appear to, and translate as
‘not yet completed’, ‘which does not fine satinfactory results,’ respectively.

76. Key-neords in literatore

In imaginative wniring all keywords acqaire symbolical caine, and become potential
metaphons geounded in the cairure. Like keywords in a technology, they are
soddenly forced to bear figurative meaning. When such words are translated they may
have to be sapported with on ortribute unless there is a strong caltaral overlap
helm eon soarer and target langaege coon

77. Translatino thifte

Ar rmporrant word (keyword) in a lost which is used inapocu lie evenso by the writer
con freur be translated ‘literally’ with an esplanation or definition. and then by a weed
reiairng 1 more closely to the target language translation, used tirvt as a
label. The latter may be adopted fee subsequent recurrence, loading the reader
‘gently’ tote a mere accepted curate word. Thus. Levi-Strauss in La Perrofe Sausage
(1962) refers to Clouor (s.c. Cbouct’s) paintings an coitur’or eel r’fdrtc’tt’oo or let boreascc
dano let boutrilbeo, cc qts’ors baogage do br-ieoteut-on oppoSe tea ‘modeler r’fduite’. The
latter rs translated as ‘small-scale models’ or ‘miniatures’, bearing Ciourr the
154 Approaches to traoslatino

miniaturist in mind, so that subsequent mentions of ‘modèle reduii’ can, in the content
nf painting cachet than bricoluge, be translated us ‘miniatures’.
Note that br’icoleur’in not translated or explained heee. At its first mention it is glossed
as ‘a man who undertakes odd jobs, Jack-of-alI-teades, a rind of peofessional PlY
man’ and then left as br’icolage/rur, since no one-word teanslation is possible, and the estendod meaning of the word is, in English, associated with Levi-Strauss.
78. Paraphrase

Paraphrase is the last (but sometimes necessary) resort of the translator.

79. Transcriptian

This concerns loan words, transferred words, adapted words.

Teanscription is mandutoty in all the following ooses, nnless there is already a
generally accepted translation likely to be accessible and acceptable to the header:
(a) pnopnc neuns—particnlarly names of people (except the Pope) and of grognaphi(b)

addresses;
(a) names of private firms;
(d) names of national public and private inslilutinns, unless they are lnanspaeent;
(e) teems peculiar to the institutions, ecology and genrealeallaee af the SL countries,
where there are no equivalents in the TL countries; and
(f) titles of newspapers, periodicals, boohs, plays, films, articles, papers, works of
art, musical compositions.
In all the abase cases, the translator may add a translation ar gloss, if he thinks this
will assist the reader. He probably will not add a translation of the names nl national
nnmspapnrs or periodicals; he will do so for learned ournals, unlnss tlsn titles one
transparent in the SL. When the translator is himself translating the body 0f a
work——see (f)—he may translate or select his own title, but append the original one
(translation couplet).
The temptation to translate foe the first time names of institutions which are
‘transparent’ in the SL should I think be resisted, since some such names, e.g.
S. Thomas Klietih, may or may ens be misleading cognales.

00. The wase process of translation

Translation difficulties that begin with one word may beelucidated as the word is sm
against its caltacation, group, clause, sentence, paragraph and whole text. The et.ly
appeal in a dilemma is to a larger unit of discourse (Shattuck, 1971). Hence
translation as a process of exer.widening ripples. Haweven the referential meaning
has pearity over the attempt to elucidate through ss’ider linguistic meanings.
 Techniques 155

81. Typical phenomena

A ‘pub’ is as typically English as a Guontdt e is Geeman and bssts’o Ftench. At world communication increases, fesvee attempts may be made te teanslate them.
82. Idiolect

One out of 500 uvoeds in any test is likely to be used isa faulty or tdtosyncrat c sense. Unless the test is an impoetant document on is svntten by an tmportant wetter, the
translator should normalize the eeror or tdsosyncrasy.

83. Translation balancing act

On the one hand, the translator should not use a synonym wheee a translatton wtll do,
in particular, mhere the translation isa ‘transparently’ faithful cognate or the standard
dictionary equivalent and has no special connotattons.
On the othee hand, he should not translate onetoone svhere one to tmo or three
mould do bettrr, non reproduce a SL syntactic structure svhere hr can recast the
more neatly. The above is the translator’s basic tightrope, balancing pole,

84. Acceptability, metaphor and trannlation

The translator has so translate everything; more prrcisely, he has to account for every
itrm of his trot by some form of translation procedure svhich may include trunscnip.
tins or ‘drlrtion’ (i.e. delibeeute omission, soy of German ‘illocutionary’ particlrs
such as abe,’, also, blono, denn, da, doch, bitte, beotimmt, eben, eigentlich, einfuch,
eetva, get’ade, halt, ja, mal, nanu, sun, nut’, noch, ruhig, ochon, uberhuupt, o’ohl—sre
Hrlbig (1977)—nr 0f redundant subheadings more characteristic of the SL than thr
TL culture). Hr ttsually cannot rrjrct any item us grammatically or lexically
unacceptable or corrigiblr, but hr still has to assess thr degree of its accrptability/cor.
rigihilily beforr deciding whether or not to normalize it. As a translator hr cannot
bicr off ‘stylistics’ as ruleasrous to semantics (Lyons (1977) dons this, but still gives
stylistics far more space than metaphor), and the last thing he can do is to be as
dismissive of metaphor as, for instance, Chomsky, who regards his notorious
‘colourless green ideas sleep furiously’ as ‘nonsensical’ (l957)—sre Nrwmark (1973)
for a ‘translation—or Lyons, who (since he often looks for logical rather than
psychological esplanations) will have nothing to do with metaphor, though he naively
admits that ‘it in by no means restricted to what is often thought of as the more poetic
use of language’ (sic). Lyons finds both tautologies and contradictions to be
linguistically unacceptable, and is careful to avoid the obvious metaphorical expluna.
tion 0f ‘He initin father’s son’ (i.e. he has all his father’s characteristic qualities) os of
the ‘anomalous’ deviant contradiction ‘My mother is younger (ic. lrss mature) than I
am’. A translator cannof afford tbis type of logic. He has to find everything
‘acceptable’, either as serious, as ironical, or as spoof: a sentence like ‘I’m me’,
156 Approaches to trorsiabur

meaning anything from ‘I hate the (pertinent) quality which the hod party (at the
second) lacks’ to ‘I’m neliable. onhke you’, shoald gise him no ttoubln.

Againforthetranslator,‘Busines isbasines ’hasicthinthecontest hesame‘social’forcean‘Aroseisaroseisaease’,while‘Abiagearsi nspoat neausbeingametalingoalstaementmayrequiretansctip anaswel ustranslati sand

ennrfcal cheek at the status (Itoqoroat, nessness, c0000tatian) of the word used to translate ‘abiogenesis’ in the TL Any tr,iaslotion theorist must praiesr an Weinreich
(toece
1972) did agaiinnstlanguage
‘KF’ (Kale and Faderand, 1964)thought
, about the fraand
aloos undioashelihepfal atlainiahan
titude of many linofguistsconcepts.
towards moraphar, whtch is the basic desice and drisieg
A translator has to bear in mind thai or a pinch any sentence and earn any lexical
word additionally, all propositions are potentially figaratice as well as spatial and
tenspotal—uan (oat at canarst) beat snsntal metaphatical inineprelutians, thai any
‘physical’ statement can also be inteepeered as a mental or imaginutise statement; and
that the process of metaphoe is as intimately connected with translation (of which, as
Sir Feast Gombrich has painted oat, the Latin, Feetich, Geemas etc., foems ate a
literal translation of the Greek) as with the esolurion of language.

85. ‘Standardiced’ jets ‘nm-standardized’ language

lathe BASF magazine, dir Grille and die Viet’te Weli becomes ‘the Third and Fourth
World’. The expression is pazzling, because the Third World is a political concepi,
denoting the non.oligeed coantrirs which are oatside the two main world power blocs.
The Fourth World, as the distingaished translator Ewold Gsees has painted oat to me,
is a standardized term, social rather than palibcal, increasingly axed in
development-aid literatare for the group of least deseloped caonrries (LDCs( The
Third and Fourth Worlds therefore aserlap, and the esplanalory ‘asetlapping’ might
have been added by the translator, unless the SL test implied a social distinction
between developing and least deseloped coastries, thereby turning standardized to
less seandaraized teems.

Accoeding to Gilbert’s Dictionnaire des molt noaeeaao, le Qaar’t.Mosde is

soua.pt’olétat’iar, popalation minét’able des pays riches, which pats the ‘Foarth World’
in the usually unnamed first and second worlds; bat this sense appears to base died an
eaely death.
Since the Fourth World, with its emphasis on bad social conditions, is included within
the Thied World, which is mane ala political term, it maybe adsisable to translate die
Dt’ine and die Vier’le Well an ‘the Third and (in particular) the Fourth World’.
Normally, a translator finding a generic teem collacated with its specific teem can only
assume either that the test is careleatly written fond that 1hz specific ierm coo
therefore be deleted in translation), or, as here, that both teems are deliberatels
mentioned, bat Ihut the SL writer wishes to draw great er alien lion to the specific

Agatn, the ercognized Greman standard trem, dee KIab det’fianf Weisen, cannot yet be
translated as it is; aneesion sach as ‘Went Germany’s committee of top economic
 Tnchsiqars 157

espeets, knoacn as “the dab of the Fis’e Wise Men”’ may lead to a

86. Phuenlngient teatenlatine

isis osaalty accepted that the phoneme ctasten ‘fl’ has a acetate common meantng to,
at toast, flame, flicken, flane, flittee, flash, flee, fltt—but not tn ‘flat’ oe ‘flank’.
Whethee such toundt can be teanstated, in poetey, tn alttteeattt’e wetttng oe to peopee
names, is an open question. German has pralten, pratt, prellen, Prunk, pruoten,
prahlen, prangen, praaoeln, praonen. it thene is an affintty, should ‘Flanhman’ become
‘Pratlman’ in a new teanslation of Tom Brown’n tchooldaya (not that snch a
is catted toe)?

87. Unfaeeihat’ abbeee’iatinns

if he meets an untamiliae abbnes’iation, a teasslaton shoald enamine his oscn test

before consulting eseny possible dictionaey. Thus ‘n.S.’ in an anticle on ‘Nephnottc
Syndeomes ansociated with malignant leucomas’.

88. RefereCe booke

Teanstatoes are stilt sraeching s’ainly for a large up.to.date Italian on a Beitish.English
dictiunuey (Burchfield’s Oaford Dictionary supplements wilt not do); for a laege
complete German—English dictionary with English as the ‘home’ language )the A of
the O.sford—Hurrap wilt be our of date tong befone the Z is done); tar a lunge German
dictionary (Duden has only eeached K). Meantime, heee are some iss’aluablc
eeteeence books: Keeaing’n (Beistot) for prominent proper names in public life since
1937, nupeebty indexed; Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, ed. by A. Bullock
and 0. Stattybrass (Fontana/Cottins ton key.woeds in the sciences beautiful,
non-technical, definitions) and the humanities, with nelevant pensonalities indexed);
Raymond Williams’s Keywords )Fontana, 1976); Payton’s proper nameo )E. Waene);
E. Partridge’s books on slang and common phrases; Gitbeet’s Dictiosnaire deo Moto
Nouceau.e )no English or German equis’atent); Longman’n Dictionary of cessecntpor’
ary Engliah; the Lurousse Dictionnaire du Françain Contemporain )Dabois) (so
Geeman equis’alent); Leaia (Larousse); Word power by E. de Boso; J. C. Cooper’s
Illuntrated dictionary of traditional ayrnbola; the Penguin companioso to literature )for
details uf translations—new editions osredue); J. Fuller’s Handbook for trasolatora;
The illuminated language offlou’era, ed. Jean Marsh )Macdonald and Jane’s).

89. German titlet

Sooner or latee, translators wilt base to standardiae the translation of Geeman titles
beginning with aetictet oe aeticlen ptun adjrctis’rs. I suggest that the article in book
tttles hr retained, ‘He eead Der Urebentechliche’ )cf. ‘Hr read The Cattle’), and that of
tnstttuttons be translatrd, ‘Hr s’isitrd the Bauhaun’. An adjrctisr in lbe second place
158 Approanhns to

should be retained (a) in the nominative case, (h) with a strong snflexson, so all
contexts ‘He woeked in the Staatlscheo Bauhuas.’ It seems to me that in
titles ace not sshject to German grumman and should he sns’arsable.

90. Trattslation and collaboration

Just as no literary masterpiece has ever been written by more than one author, a
first-rate translation mast be written by one person can only bear the stamp of one
idiolect. Go the other hand, when I look at most literary trunslatsons wsth these
‘incredible’ bowlers, tam amazed balsa many have nither not been seen by a tanned
person or hare been incompetently checked. The notorious TL husband plus SL wife
couples(there ueesrvrrat,but’obviously’IhuvetheMuirsinmsnd)OrefarfrOm
foolproof, because the reviser’s knowledge of the TL must also be instsnctsve—thus on
SL-speaking partner is disqualified usa reviser. Anyone who submits a translation (or
an article on translation theory) without having it checked is courting calamity.

91, Frnm sense to metapbnr?

Forty years ago, Ritchie translated soo rnnemio us ‘addle-paled enemies’. Is such a
translation ever justified? Where an adjective has an obvious one-to- one eqsivalrnt
which is attn communicatively effective, there is no reason to replace it with
metaphor. However, in ‘informative’ or ‘vocative’ texts such a replacement may be
s’alid if it is osed as ‘nompensution’ to balance the more common ‘metaphor to tenon’
transition in another part of the test or as a means of enlivening a translation.

92. Peripheral cultural terms

A cultural term on the periphery of the tent should normally be given an approximate
translation or cnltural equivalent (e.g. Foonacht as ‘carnival’, Km’meooeas ‘fête’,
Mustermenoe ‘trade fair’) rather than be transcribed. One does not want to bother the
reader of any type of tent with opaque transcriptions 0f little importance. Again, if
dam use ralfée écat’tée dela Cordillês’e den Andes isgoing to play no furtherpart in the
test, it is appropriate to at trust delete the ros’dilles’a and translate ‘in a remote valley
of the Andes’.

93. Flexibility

The translation theorist in many respects has to fotlow the translator in bring flexible
and adaptable. I take a quotation from Dr Gaulle, ‘La France glissera do silence dr Ia
mer a l’asthénir definitive’, and suggest, as a semantic translation, ‘France will slip
from a death-like silence to a state of permanent weakness’ with, if required, a brirl
gloss. Leoilence defames’ is the title 0f Vercors’ book, bat only the connotations and
the reference (occupied France) are relevant, not the language, and therefore a
translation or a transcription of the title within the test would be meaningless.
 Techniques 159

94. Misprints and lateral thinking

‘Elle avait un avéakotobrom congenital’. Thus a case history in yet another French
medical journal. The ‘uvra’ is clear, but how does one handle the still improbable
kolobrom? ‘If k doesn’t work, try c’ is a possible translator’s brut, which takes one
straight to ‘a congenital coloboma of the avea’ (i.e. a fissure of the iris). A translator
can sometimes waste hours on contents, refereuce books, etymologies, etc., when he
should merely be thinking of mispnints, misspellings, missing words, etc. Translating
inescelleut training in lateral thinking, oes’tcer’erna.
Sense has to he pursued in the most unlikely circumstances, but somehow reconciled

Searle (1979) is a tiresome article has demonstrated that no sentence is independent

of contest, that ‘Lo chat ost santo paillasson’ may mean anything but what it appears
to mean; Wittgensteiu shows that if A = 3 and B 4, A + B inner 7 sf A is already a
pant of B. All translation theory can do is to point to and warn of the remotest
possibilities.

95. ‘Not fnnnd’ again or neologintin ahbreniationn

In a medical test, a neologism unpunctuated by invented commas is likely to be a
blend, an abbreviation or a misprint, i.e. not a neologism. In the sentence:
‘L’antibiothérapie s’imposr en dvitant, hire entendu, Irs cyclines susceptibles de
dancer use cautrue jaune intense et definitive aus dents permaneutes de l’enfant’
astibiothét’apie is a transparent blend for ‘antibiotic treatment’; cycline as such is not
given is any ref censor book, but any list of antibiotics includes the tetracycline group,
and therefore the lay translator is ‘forced’ to this translation which he has to check
with an informant. In the above passage, the peosimity of two synonyms defisiticen
and pen’masestet forces the translator to use an alternative ‘standardized’ term for
desn per’maseseea: therefore, ‘Antibiotic treatment is eequired, but (clearly) tetracy
dine preparations which may produce a permanent intense yellow colouring on the
child’s second teeth must no be administered’. Note that the translation of bien
estesdu, an instance of phatic language, is optional.

96. Dialect words

Dialect words fluctuate in usage and can sometimes mIre common currency. Here,
even old’fashioned, ‘out of date’ dictianaries can come into their own: Us homme
erresé qui musquait de aouffle. Enn’esé could be located as a synonym for éreisté only
in the large Littr’é.

97. Headings and titlen

These should normally be translated last. A nan-literarytest or book shauld normally

hr factually and accurately described by its title. A literary tent may havr its title
160 Approaches to trarsiatiur

changed to an appropriate connotation. Uxuatty, the translator hat coutrol otee the
title of any test.
A heading or titte is static, and describes a finished narrutton: it should normally be
centSchrittr
red on one orgegen
two nouns, andIran’
hate SL rmight
’r bs conoertebecome
d to present or par‘Varce’s
t participles qualifyattempt
ing them. Thus, ‘Vtoanceget
oachr inrenewed
Weoteuropa UnteroWestern
tutoungfurneue
Earopran support against lean’.

98, Doable ts’aeslatias

In an article on Selbatcerwaltusg dee Wirluchaft auf dem Geboet dee Technotchen

Ubern’achang (BASF no. 05, 1979, printed in hoe larguages)—’Autonomy in
industry: lbesaperoision and inspection of plants and appliances—-the word Selbalcernaltung,
being a themewoed, is frequently repeated, and, therefore, most be
repeated a the various translations. In the contest, ‘autonomy’ is the best choice, but
is rot sufficiently explicit; and the English translator of the first sentence, ‘Dew
Begeitf der Selbxtt’erwalrung halter ao, doss resich writhin mit mittlebaree Stootoorowaltung
drckt’, rightly adds the more explicit meaning: ‘The teem “autonomy” implies
that the activities ala self-administered body tie in closely with indirect administratoor
by the state.’ (The French translator’s aurogeorioo suggests this word may soon lose its
political consolation and socialist denotation.) ‘Doable Iranstarion’ (‘two bites at the
cheery’) is a procedure where one makrs two separate attempts to cuter the meaning
of a seed, is this ease ‘autonomy’ and ‘the activities of a self-administered body’.
Aspects of meaning

99. The pt’insaeynffmling

The persueslsee lement or passage in a tent mast be treated rtgerousty end sstth some
imagination by the transtator, since It is tntended te rouse feelteg, If net actten, tn ho neader. Usuatty tin mere cottoqaiat in t yte than the tetormetne end the expeesnne
element Syntacttcatty, tangaages tppeee to dttfer tar more tstdely nhen ttsed to
express feetrngs end gire endees and instructions than to make statements. Compare
the statement, ‘The paint ts wet’, tapeintur’e eatfr’aIchedse Far’bo tot nate tstth the
maening: ‘Wet paint’ pr’exeo garde a ta petxtur’efr’lach geatnchex.

Somecniticsbetiex’ethatthecognitisefuncttor otatesttsmereimportextthaxtts
persuasise (en rnperssix’e) fanction; that whitst in transtellor cogntttse (i
ttngatnttc) accuracy can and must always be achiered, the other lacIer, the conneta
tile, stylistic or ‘pragmatic’ (the retarton of the receisee and the transmitter to the
text in the sense of Peirce and C. W. Mernis(, defies accuracy, and is therefore
secondary. K. Batdtngrr has referred to it us u ‘hate’ raced lbe cenceptuat content;
A. Neubert states that enty the ‘pragmatic’ Is urtranslarabte. ThIs widespread idea
appears mistaken to me; a glance at the entries for, say, ‘Munich’ or ‘Hitler’ ix. nay.
the Petit Lar’ouate or the Quillet Flammaxorr saggests that lesicegraphers teed to
tease out the most important facts for fear at their Appell effect or thetr re,tders.
Thus Sntzhenirsyn’s remark tn his (undetisered( Nobel Price speech: ‘The spIrIt of
Munich1t is a sickness of the mitt of successful people; ills the daily condttion of
these whe hase gisrn themnetsen up to thtnst after prexperdy’, could ret bc
understand witheur an explanation of the signiftcance (i.e. connotation) of the
Munich agreement, which is semantically t’asrly mere important than Its cegxittre
definition, i.e. a summary of the agreement.

100. Distingnishing linked synnnyms

Synenymsincettecutinnonclosepreximtryinrheseurce languagetenrmusrbeclearly
distinguished nrmanttcatty in the larger language text. This rule applies to pseudosynnnyms
such as rins rI alceoh, explication and explaratten, ecabr’ouo or hanar’deuo
as so she great pantrchnicon words like pr’orxosox. desrfopment, maror’iel,
équipemenr etc. which must be distinguished, partly through wider contest, ix any
coftecarixn ttke conetr’uotiex ol amerlagomrxt (whIch may be ‘design and lay-out’).

There are, heweser, presues. The saurce language tent must be well wrttrer, as
synenyms are sometimes used carelessly and pendereusty, as in Objrkte und
Gogenardnde; semelimes mainly for emphasis, as tn ‘deeply and profeandly’, tender
ifi
162 Apptoaches to teanslation

and loving’, ‘direct and straightforward’, and because pairs of adj ectives sometimes
improve the rhythm of a sentence; audio oldlegalpheases, so cover the Genmanic and
Romance alternatives, as in ‘without let or hindeance’, ‘goods and chattels’, etc. The

tdiffeeent,
ote is thenefone a synonymous,
tricky one. Sometimes, when,oveelapping,
say, materiel, equipementcearwhether
e juxtaposed in athetong letc
ist, it is(possibly
dif icult toe the teansfmalénel)
ator to know whetincludes
her they are
the other, and whethor the writer himself hocus.

tOt, Nrgatinrs and contraries

if it is difficult to find acongnurnt equivalent of an item in the tunget language, it iv
often possible to ‘decompose’ it into a negative and its contrary or conttadictory term.
Au obcious example in ‘shallow’, pox pt’csfond. Normally, the force of the positive iv
weakened in this procedure: peu profcnd is not as shallow as ‘shallow’. The best
equisalence is obtaincd if the Irsical item has little affective force: e.g. Leo infectiono
en debut’s des péi’iodes d’epidémie, ‘infections which do not occur during epidemic
periods’. Strictly, en dehorn de is stnonger than ‘not . . . during’, but us this is an
informative communication without espiessive or emotive overtones, the equivalent
effect is achieved. Conversely, it is often advisablr to consrrt a ncgative pcemodifying
a lexical item into a positive conteary on conteudictory teem. For esample: ‘Non
azzardato pensarr che l’atilita delle leghe si sia manifestata all’uomo Ia prima volta
cite ana spada di rome cocoS contno una spada di bronco’, ‘It is quitr likely that man
first became awarn of the usr of alloys when a coppnn sword clashed with a bronco

103. American neologisms

Some American words pass into other languages before they reach English, and
translator faced with a technical or colloquial neologism in any language should make
an early attempt so ‘place’ it in the great Webster’s Dictionary. This, Son inssuncr, is
where he will find sociateie (sociatry), which is not even in L. Gilbert’s encollent
Diclioanaii’e dec nooceaux mzls.tn

103. Intecreate

Intorforesce is the translator’s worst peublem, unit in the language Irunner’s. Failuer
to recognize interference makes him look mont foolish. So many thousand English
wnrds—scabrous, scurrilous, fatal, masks, colossal, assure, copious, beutal, reduced,
adrqoatr, dislocation, trivial, banal, useful, attests, efforts, altesations, prrfosating,
solicitations, moment, fraction, massive, promotion, contingent, concern, studio,
central, rate, permanence, instance and so os—have other meanings when pronounced
in French or German with French or German suffixes. And so many foreign
words have one primary etymological snnnn, but another in the content in which they
ate now more frequently used, e.g. ii (conjunction), pi’écoir, coi’nehen, Anlage,
Leisiong, Spielar’t. Gften their motivated transparency makes them mone opaque than
 Aspectsufrneaning 163

strictly opaqur words. Ei’ery yrar now, more English goes into West Germau ond
Russias goes isto East German, asd when adopted, starts a life of its own, whilst the
special tangaage of technology, which is also otter the language of the media, spans
the world. Borrowed words take up one sense, sometimes the less common one, and
trace others behind. A motis’ated word in one language becomes opaque and
non-motis’ated in another, and consersely. Interference is the chaotic as well as the
dynamic element in a languafe, continually breaking up the system oii louise nest
(Meillet) creating too many senses for one word or too many words for one thing.
There is nooses restricted rule for this problem, but only the translator’s one
unrestricted rule: mind the sentence, mind the word, and finally mind the sentence.
‘Translated words always lie, but translated tests only lie when they are badly
translated.’ (Translated from Haeald Weinrich’s Linguioiike dee Liige.(°

Working as he does on and in parole, nei’er on or in langue,25 the translator can only regard dictionaries, grammars and works on linguistics with caution, and wil fas’oue
those mith the masimum number of citations and a context-sensitu’e arrangement
like uthesaurus. Finally, only a massise common sense, more like a good genreal’s or a statesman’s than an intel ectual’s, wil protect him against his own ingenuity, his
eecherchf and rustic brainwases, which are so often idiotic; so easy to think of the bonn dn monastèr’e as the ‘wooden obtects (perhaps the furniture) isa monastery’, the
castes ss’aditiossnelles du desert occidental ‘emplaceeopas’ dot caries de Gi’èce as ‘the

fortunes of Greece sum taking precedence ones the usual one of the Western desert’. until he makes a deliberate pause to res’iew the whole posit on; so easy to select
anything but the obs’ious sensible interpretation.

104. Bühler and Fegecontrted

The connrcties between Frege’s and Bühler’s theories of languafe and its application
in translation can be illustrated by an esample. The phrase, Arbeitnelssser organioaiocinch
odes raumlich abgegr’enoier’ Beir’ieboteile (Bundeogeoeioblaii 1972, Teil 1, 4
Abechnstt, Paragraph 42, Absatz2, Satz 1) is condensed in thought and not easy to
render. Being a legal test, it is designed to impress the reader (Appell), but this
particular phrase is purely informatisr. Essentially, the translator isconceened with
thsught (Frege’s Sins) or test, but whenes’er the thought is difficult, he attempts
temporarily to put aside the test and make up his mind what is really happening— whattrnsls doest se test really referto? Hr therefore transfers to the teed of Frefe’s
Bedenrnng and considers Bühler’s Dar’otel ung function. In the oh one case, we assume that the reference is to a firm’s employees who are either organised in separate
departments, or who work in separate plants or buildings. The translator now
attempts to turn Bedeusung back to Sins (a common procedure; consersing ‘inloematins
translation’ to ‘publication translation’), but isis difficult is do so, since he basso
retain the generality ot or’ganisasorisch and the slight ambiguity of rdumlich. Therefore,
paradusically, in making his own interpretation of Sinn, the translator introduces
a subecsss’e element, the lesel of Vesosellung, and lakes the Anodruek fusctios
of the original into account. A possible translation is, ‘Employees in a company’s sarions dssssions or in its separate buildings’.
764 Approaetrtt to

Buhloe’s Dceotel uog astd Feege’s Bedrutuog one percrsely eqao’aleot If a tent had purely this function (but it octet has(, it could in theony be mandated litenally. Frege’s
Ann ts thought on tanguage, the exuouttal medium uf tnaoslatton. Bahlnr’s Appnll ts
often no mote than a putt of an utterance; it is the dttecttve element tn alegal text, the
persuasise nlement in a recommendation, the emottse element to afttetany tent, or

antosraction ranorde.Itsontyhigestcom onfactorapeanstobe‘socatve’BabIes’ Auods’tnkandFreg’sVot’selangan bothsubjectse,andtheransltorshouldnctpectieyatemptocntai,fnotclimeatc(mhtc sofcursetmposxtble(.thou ntoments.Houcet,naIteurywork,therlmentxof‘tar and.Vor’ntelu

are likely to be mono significant than in other texts. Moneoser, hone Bedetttuog tx no
forget entralirguixtic reatt y; Otto to a natunaltxtic wonk, it mahrx lt t e dtf erence ohether the beta earns fogy on 999 maths a month. The nature of Bedectuog depends
on the translator’s or rho third neadee’s (the translatton crttic’x( toteepeetatson of rho
source luegaage (SL) authon’s aertxttc theory: in a natoratisttc uork, rt should
admittedly be anclono an partible to eurealirguirtic reality; in a symbolist nook, tm rho
refrrerce of the symbols; in ‘art too ant’s sake’, it is identical with Sino, ot000-estut000;
fur me, it is rho Dichtem”n (crrutioe writer’s) critique of hamun bohusiour, which is
constructed oat of basically ftgaratiuo, allegorical romantic units. Iris rho translator’s
job to rearspose thorn figuratise units into rho target language (TL(. ‘My lose is like a
rrd ted nose’ mitt took different in a culture whreo rests areuncommon and rot notablc’
brnuhtul and ptay no melody.

105, Tenarailles

Macking euaminatioo papeox, 1 take off mackr far indisputable mistakes (in extra-
linguistic eeality)—trutk-mistakes—aod usually huff-marks for stylistic barbarisms and
infetrcimies—axage-mistakex. I gtse saluabte and rather snbjectisr ‘ptux’ marks for
tr’oacaitlerotserbat flashes of perception. Tt’oucaitfes are xxx ally onr to at feast two
words or at feast twa to one wood translations; it they are err to one, the rendering
opprosed of miff probably not be found in a dictionary. They may ho grammatical or
lexical: a grammatically eeformrd sentence that retains or clarifirs an emphasis maybe
a tt’oxt’aitfe, as may the rendering of aeunusxat collocation. The essence uta rr’ouu’amlle
isthatir intaims a meanirgbehind a few words; itexistsin betweenthewordx intheserse
that Meaner wrote that the best music ix to the silence brtwern the notes. A food
translator maycreate a tt’out’atfle in any kind of test; it ix mistaken to think that literary
translation ixconcernedwith tr’euc’ailler, andxay legal tranxlationwithterminology. On
any topic, a rr’oacaiffe may teanumir information on a particular beet of eu’alaatsse,
affectise oe intensise language. It may show a delicate balance betwconcernotation
and designation. It represents a minimal amount ofenteopy,Ot in Vinay’s (1976) sense,
andaspiresaroncetoaRacinianelegance andcomplexsimpliciry. Allhoughitlinkxthe
text to exrralinguixtic reality, a rr’oar’aittr also has the sabjectise non-communicable
elrmonr which Walter Benjamin ran’ an rho euxeece of teannfation.tt

106, The limnits ni rsnrd meaning Inc aerneamsy’s sake

A word can mean anything at all under the following conditions:
 Aspectsuf meaning 165

(a) that it has a stipitfative ltcetrce to do so; (b) that it toentt part of a special codr;
(c( that it is spokrn or writ en in error, or is a misprint; (d( that the aathoe is weiting under stress (feat, il ness)
all the oh ocr cases, the teanslaioe still has to discover the woed’s meaning.

Howev r,undernormalcir umstances,themeani gofawordcan ev rbewholydictaedorconditonedbyitslinguistcorsita rioralcontest.Akitenmaybechalon,apesilchaterapolitechate,hoti sres tachies.Thetemantc onto tsof
conceptual teems are oft en vaguer and wider, but oyotème must not be translated as
‘urrungcmont’, unless us purr of a recogninod colfocutron (unknown to me)!
Theoretically, at any rate, all words hare a minimum semantic content, that is our or
two primary sensuntic components which form putt of each of their meanings, and which must thoroforo ho ‘r untfcreod’ in uny reunsfation; there are the boundaries of
translation, beyond which reanslation becomes paraphrase. Certainly, an item is often
transfated by another item which is not given as its equivalent inmost dictionaries, but
most frequently it trill be ‘pragmatically’ rather than ‘semantically’ different (or be in
another ‘register’ and will be found in the thesaurus, as a synonym; a hyponym
(approximately, a specific or subordinute term) may also be translated by, as iris
often referred tn by, its hyperonym (generic orsuperordinate teem), in particular if
the ore or the ether it minting in the TL or SL, but tometimet also as an alternative to
the precise equivalent. Frequently, a new meaning of a word is a logical entension of
its precious shifts of meaning, and can be accounted toe by the translator; thus,
rnrar’ée=tide—swuve--sfish (curried by tide)—sfishing expedition.
But what a translator has no right to do is to substitute a secondary or nonce meaning
of an item for a primary meaning which fits perfectly in the contest; not may he
replace a linguistic allusion too referent with its ordinary name or technical teem, or a
paraphrase. For the sake of clarity, he is entitled to being the linguistic allusion closer
to the referent, but he is not entitled simply to same the referent. Thus in the
sentence, ‘Le grand défaur des mécanismesnaturels est d’être irsuffisamment
prnspectifs. If rut sensible dursun demuine comme l’amfnagement du territoire, nit
duréesecompse pun décennies’, it is illegirimute to translate mdcuninmet naturelo
simply us ‘Nature’, which is the referent; ‘natural mechanisms’ is unhelpful; I suggest,
‘The use great deficiency of the processes n6 nature is that they cannot think ahead
sufficiently’.

107. Primacy as csmsssnnestnseassing

Translators (in particular) are apt in confuse a previous with the present primary
meaning of a word. Thus, in my opinion, the primary (most grequent) meaning of the
cunjuscriunni (Fe.) urge (It.) in written language is ‘whereas (whilst, although)’ (eight
times nut nf ten?), whilst the English ‘if’ only has this meaning once nut of ten.
Similarly, pr’dcoir’ usually means ‘specify’, assurer ‘provide’, intér’df ‘advantage’ more
utter than ‘interest’. Thus the must frequently applied meaning tends to be ‘hidden’
by the former primary meaning, and the latter tends tube inguenced if not motivated
by etymology, interference and tradition as preserved in dictionaries and grammars,
166 Approaches tn

both of which aro so often ‘updated’ (‘new odition’, i.e. a few additions!) instoad of beiog completely rewrit en. (Again pear at pear’ent means ‘may mach more often
than ‘can’, but ne peat or cc peuvenr usually means cannot

108. Lexical universals

A translator is always lookinf toe linguistic and/oe semantic aoa’oetalt, that is lestcal
items that have mono or less the same application in two at mote televunt languages,
sometimes called isomorphous units. The most likely instances ace woeds denoting
objects commas to the ecologies, e.g. sun, moon, eaeth, sea (German ban Iwo woeds), stat, plus sand, plant, gowee, rain (Russian has no verb), cloud, etc. if lb etc esist.
Even here, past or prosent linguistic interference causes bifurcation and specialization of teems. Sun and moon appear to be lesical constants, but English and German
distingaish between ‘sky’ and ‘heaven’, French has two words toe ‘rises’ and Russian
one foe ‘wood’ and ‘teen’. Dutch has the same moed foe ‘sky’ and ‘air’, German
normally the same for ‘hilt’ and ‘moontain’. Moreovee, the connotations of all these
weeds ace likely to be different in each language.
Parts of the body, common human activities and kinship terms would appear to have
claims to univeesality, but in fact there ace great differences, as languages distinguish
between animals and human beings differently, and kinship has gaps, is frequently
matr’dominaled or related to castes and hierarchies. Moreover, Russian does not
distinguish between hand and arm, nor, like French, between finger and toe; only
English appears In recognize a knuckle, and tongue and language are often the same
word. Italian does not distinguish ‘hearing’ from ‘feeling’ (as Mozart with his
incomparable wit and humanity pointed out in Figaro), nor French feeling from
smelling, and German lasting is homuphonous with costing—she situation appears
absurd.

The only semantic innariables appear to be the numbers, and a few teems in shut
lexical field (minuses, seconds, days of week, months) when applird in their physical
sense. Recent inventions are also temporarily isomorphous, and not surprisingly
translators are interested in their standardization. Words denoting universal natural
objects are likely to hr mere isomoephous than ethers, bat the theme only confirms
the partial correctness of she Whoef—Sapir thesis anticipated by Humboldt. However,
incontent suchwords are much easier to translate than those more obviously coloured
by lbe users’ lertings and lhonghts.

109. Cenceptual terms

RaIf Daheendorf°3 has noted shut ‘by the very fact ol misleading, translations can
create terms that can acquire a life of their owe’. The comment is correct, but it often
has unfortunate linguistic consrqaences. (The phrase ‘acquire a life of its own’ often
has a sinislrecessolalien in other fields, particularly psychialey.) Dahrendorf is
referring to the common translation of Max Wrbrr’s concepl of Stand as ‘status’,
though it in fact means both ‘status’ and ‘estate’, (An ‘estate’ is a closed straum of
soctety, based on property rather than money, with a cnmmnn mode of life and
 Aspects of nenanieg 167

s’alues.)‘This anexampleofthe xigenciesoftranslatios —asdofsheirceati’ y.’Certainly,conceplsmenteansfated(ortansliterated)often aeno ’ordefl ct hes meani gorden’elopasecondarymeani g.Web e’sStand,hou’ec e,ap ruentohare
been either t’aeiously translated (by Talcott Parsons) on pinned to a single inadequate
nermain
d such asones
‘status’ oris‘staratuTLm’ mitcollocation,
hoat inducing any erratin’hieh
xity at all. A betmayter peocbeeduneshortened
mould be to analystoe theitssemanthead
ic featurenoon
s of the comhere
ncept and incthe
lude its
reference is uomistakablr. The intensin’e meaning of Stood appears to be a closed,
organic status on stratum, and this appears to be the best clue for acresioo.

110. Refes’entiat synonymy

If the translator is concerned mithpat’ale and the lesicolof ins mith tongue, they look at
questions of moaning and synonymy differently. The translator recognizes that
theonetically and cogniticely, no too mords oat of content hoer the same moaning.
Within a content they feequrntfy do so, either for the purpose of denoting the same
obtect (almost haphazardly, e.g. Barbara Castle, the en-minister, the red-haired
sos.deisee)it on because they accused carelessly, on because the mhole meight of the
sentence, its teuth satan, is in the eheme, the sen infoemation, is mhich their separate
semantic featuers ann sot ineolt’ed. Thus the follominfi tentoncos may hoer the
meaning for the teanslator:

Theme Rheme
I. He/Me. Smithfl’he man
I met yesteeday/The ran fast.
dank gentleman in the
black suit

Rheme Theme
2. I considered this matter/my problem/
the plants in the facden.

The teanslator accepts the folloming propositions: (a) each of the aboco nets of
sentences may hoer the same truth ealue; (b) in any teanslation, the nra’ information
should hose prionity oerr the old; (c) nesertheless the full linguistic ealur of the theme
should normally be nepeoduced, rico though its semantic features (e.g. the man’s
name, mhat he man meaning, mhen I met him etc.) are of no intenest as they are
alneady knomn. For the transluton, the theme han a theoeetically infinite uumbce of
synonyms, to be used an concenience, mhilst the rheme has none at all. (d) If the
tnanslaton is asked no make cuts, he should cut parts of the theme, once the eheme.

Similanty, the precise meaning of a nord may be unimportant, so that any of its
appeopriate meanings can be selected, proeided the truth eater of the sentence is not
impained. Thus in a medical article, in thesentenee. ‘Alma qu’il utilioait one tzupic, oa
main gauche a été pi’ite par to machine’, tuiepie may ho a cortical or milled cutter or
shapee of a moulding-machine or any kind of lathe; no further clue is gicen in the test,
feom either the linguistic content or the situation. The only impontant facts about the
168 Approaches to

toapieare(1)tharitsoperatorisajoiner,(2)thathecancatch tshandtost,(3)thatcanthencausea10cmtongitudinatwoandonthehackot hehand,nest otheftestmetac rpat.Ther is copether fore(a)forsyno ymstodescetbethesame

rachiue-to ,(b)foecitngoe fanumberofmachine-tols,peoside they oneth featrospesioalymentioed.Sinceth aerict sconendmth et amentofhemoundtheprcise atse atherotdoesnoti erstherader.Thetranst orshoatdsiltrysotirdoutfromthesnoec-tesauthor,asfrthe questonsabouthe
wound may arise, and also as a matter ot professtonal pride.
Bat alt translation isa compromise, a balancing. The translator disttegatshrs between

the degree at importance in the meanings, forms, soards a his rout; ho has to discriminate on a continuum from the central y to the peripheratly important. The
truth satue as seen by the weitor, or the reader, on as a countd of the facts of the case
is, deproding on the function of the test, his criterion.

111. Dnuble negatires

All double refatises base a possible ‘strong’ or ‘weak’ interpretation, i.e. ‘rut
unworthy’ may mean ‘estremely worthy’ or ‘quite worthy’.

112. Prsitive rr negatire

In his study of the grammar at a sentence, the translator frequently has to decide
whether the total effect is ‘just’ posirise or ‘just’ rrgatiue. There is a large difference,
for uny Ammeoso che. . . between ‘esen if we udrtit that’ and ‘grunted that’. Words
like délicat, ‘critical’, ‘arguable’, diocueable may be put on either side of the critical
borderline. Note how some words like ‘hopes’, ‘elfoets’, ‘attempts’, ‘difficulties’ mast
be ‘resolned’ positisely or negatisely; in fact, they are tesolurd negarisely rather mete
often. A negatine negates a posirine in salee is basso. A doable nefatise just becomes
positise in mere butte racer di niru (‘net such u low stosdurd of icing’).

113. Referential spnnnyms

The translator has so distinguish between the occasions calling foe the use of
rrferenriut synonyms (for cohesion; to usoid repetition; to supply estru informurion;
poor or diffuse writing), before he decides hum to handle them. Normally he asoids
them, since they are con fusing or umbigueus to the reader. He prefers repetitions,
particularly if his own reader is less fumitrue with the subject matter than the first

114, Semantic fielde

Parriculur words thur are sietnutty synonymous may cluster round particular semantic
helds; thus an Italian eegion may bane programmi, an industrial sector piani.
 Anpnntsnftnnanirtg 169

A good translation runs along a narrow ridge between synonytny and pnintany (tnstead
contestual) weaning coenespondencn.

115. Phatir language

A writ or ases phatic languago in ondnn to establish an appnopntatn rolattonshtp with his
neadon. Such language way consist of social formulae (fot’molro drpolitrunr), German
fillon-wonds (ja, ochon, etc.) orrt’en allitrnated words to attract attention. The
translator has to distinguish the phatic form from the donotatise niement and nonden it
in the appnoprsate terms of the sounce language, which ate likely to hat’e little
semantic resemblance to those of the oniginal, e.g. ‘Yours faithfully’, hochachtungtcolt,
Jo coot peio d’agt’éet’ oboe Montieue l’eapt’eution do met tentimenn leo p1st
diotinguet. He also has to note consciously on unconsciously deceptit’e phatic phnoses.
such as ‘you know’, ‘beliece me’, ‘seriously’, ‘honestly’, ‘as is well known’ (Stalin),
‘it’s intenesting to note that’, ‘doubtless’, ‘of course’, ‘ecidently’, ‘obcioosly’, etc.
Which mean tintually the opposite of what they say.

116. Menial moi’dn

Translation of words denoting artifacfs is likely to be less accurate than that of mental
weeds, since minds are closet to each other than cutturaf phenomena. Mental words of
thaughi and calculation are likely to translate more accurately than mental words of
feeling and appraisal, since the latter draw more on metaphoes. The me no specific a
ward, the tess accurate its translation, since it comprises more semantic teatanes.

117. Er’alnatir’e language rn negatires

When cuniradictory feems are semantically close to each other, the positise (e.g.
‘competent’, congt’u, ‘sufficient’, ‘adequate’, ‘satisfactory’, ‘useful’) is sometimes
used in a negatis’e sense, and a pasitise term in one language may hate a negato’e
equin’aleni in another.

118. The semanliso cns’r

Words are said to possess a stable semantic core and unstable, changing scnfaces
which ‘fit’ in t’aeious contests. The worst problem for a teanslaton is often when the

surface fluctuates between positise and negatice: thus legaliort’ may mean ‘to legalioe’ or its n’irtual opposite, ‘to being under legal control’.
119. Oppnsslinn

Oppositions, like tustaposed synonyms, may clarify distinctions: pnychologkechet’ odet’

mar’photogischer’ Kopfschmer’z =psyehnlogical or physical headache, ooufft’ance
phytique can mot’ale=physical or emotional suffering.
170 Approaches tO translation

120. Clarification

In an informative test, it is always the translator’s nb to clarifyasentence in lion with

the intention brhind the inst. Than: ‘La gamme dos sols’ants oryaniqoes participo ace
ira do rooletto rosse’, ‘Every type of organic solvent is implicated in this ttemendoos

121. Faso emit and antitJidèlen

Aol hose soid bcforc, the translator will osualfy find as many cognales with the same
meanings in SL and TL as those with different meanings, and he most not hesitate to
ose the appropriate TL cognate. However, he most never translate any word he has
not previously seer withoof checking it, and this is where cognates are deceptive.
Eiéganc victoaffy covert the semantic range of ‘elegant’. but inelëgani ranges trom
‘inelegant’ throogh ‘discoarteous’ to ‘dishonest’. (Sopermarheis worn afoinst dioxin
inélégartts who do not show the content of their caban.)

122. It all depends on the contest

Not always. Intrenationafisms ipso facto do not depend on thr contest. Nor, osoally,
does the meaning of any compound words, and many words with affixes (‘hypernensi.
five’, ‘define’, exophot’ie). But many technical words with affixes hove different
meanings in different technologies: exfolier’, exootose. However, the more particular
the meaninguf a treed, the fess it depends on the contest. And a vast nomberof words
have one meaning most of the time. And unless one says so, what one can make a
word mean is, puce Witfgenstein, usoalfy limited. But with all that, yes, it u.toally
depends on the contest.

123. Lexical accuracy

Accuracy in communicutise tronsfution is basicaflyfexical. The translator can treat the
grammar flexibly and adroitly within limits, recasting units to strengthen 5 he logic of
the text. But the cxix must be accurate. I have a test which gives ‘ill’defined’ for
aléaeoit’e, ‘abnormality’ for déciatiox, ‘outlined’ for décr’icii, etc. This sort of approximation
wilt nut do.
Punctuation

124, Italics, sndes’lining and inverted comman

A teanslatee into English usnatty noderltnes words:

(a) whrn they make op the titles of printed material, plays, music, pictures, esc.
(b) when they are foreign;
(c) to distinguish. contrust or emphasize their importuner.
Such weeds ore olsen italicieod in print, depending on the publication’s hoase.style.
The translator (and the printer) normally uses inverted commas for:
(a) quotations;
(b) dialogue;
(c) complements of verbs of designation (e.g. p’éneneé comme ‘rincecteme’ ea
‘cream rinse’, ‘known as “perfect”’;
(d) literal transtatton, particularly of grrio cultural words and collocations; usually
in brackets indicating, often aft re reproducing the original, that these ace
unacceptable but help to explain the meaning, e.g. ‘Betufnvet’bee, “prohibition of
employment”, the FRG law which denies civil service posts to political exteemor
publicieé inneitationnette’ ‘institutional advertising’. (Single contrast with
doable inserted commas.)

The translator may also use inverted commas (italics or inverted commas in print) foe
the following stylistic purposes:

(a) unfamiliar technical terms (e.g. ‘poweetrain’ (groupe motops’opalnzas dune

automobile));
(b) names of new inventions ‘hoeomèter’ (mono’e a diapanen). (The translator could
risk ‘horometer’, based on the French horemErre);
(c) neotogivms. sia. newly formed werds or words used in a strange or unusual sense,
e.g. ‘Leo objets mix a Ia disposition des usagees soot “pnftisds” par Ia recheeche
dune muequr de commerce aux consnnances.’ Peéei.tén could be ‘poeticized’
(neologism foe neologism) or normalized us ‘given a poetic quality by .
Likewise, raueemebile qu’il ru ‘cendre’ = the car he (an advertiser) is about to

(d) words uted ironically, contradictorily or paradoxically, r.g. ‘La respunsabilitd

d’uvuir abhtuedi Ia publicité incombe a des “teadacteurs” qui o’ont de teadactear
qur Ic nom.’ Translate: ‘translators io name only’, or ‘Quand nor annnnce pséne
Ir snobisme rIle mimetisme social Ir publicitaire a’t-il Ic denit de proposer cet
“ideal” sea compatriotes?’ Teanslale: ‘ideal’;
171
172 Approuehrn to

(e) woods used to make an impeesssen, foe instance usa slegae (agarn contrudtctory),
e.g. ‘Le teuductrue ne doit-il pus ftee “Ic speciatiste de tout”?’ Teanstation: ‘the
spociutist aft-rounder’;
(f) words deliberately mssuxrd: e.g. die ‘eopoetnimittioche’ Beo’egurg, the ‘expresstm(g)
oedsregardedusstangorjargorcLamecortnais5attced0frc0tstesoftigf
s’esprimer en “joual”, tout to peéteste de “farce québdcoo”.’ ‘At there knon’edge
of French is poor, they have so speak “joaal”, tho French Canadran dsulect,
with the escuse that they ace behavsng like Quebecoss’;
(h) woods used as thoogh quoted, toe which the author (and transtator) does not want
to take responsibility, e.g. ‘these men were
(i) whore the author transtatoe wants to cast doubt on thr truth ot upproprtatrness of
thr word in thr contest (atteenativety: ‘Thr itatics are mtne’), e.g. ‘Hr ctaimed
that “democracy” reigned in Chite’,
(j) a word used imaginarir’ely or figuratively outside its usuat contest, ‘L’adaptuteur
teavaitle done sur an “peodait fin”;
(h) unusuut cnltncutiens, e.g. ‘hypnetismr verbat’;
(t) maginury quotations: ‘On l’inciteru a se ren doe “des aajourd’hui” dues ur
mugusin’ becomes ‘immediately’;
(m)to indicate an accepted and import art concept: e.g. ‘L’hommr de t’rspnit doit se
rêduire sciemment a an refus indegini d’être quni qur cc soil’, or ‘She believes
there can be as much “human truth” in crime novels as in any other form of

(n) to inetute or distinguish ucencrpt from itscorreut: e.g. ‘Pour ma part jer’uccepte
errien te theme do “tigre” utitisf par plusieurs produirs’;
(o) to adapt a wett-known phruse, r.g. ‘Ptos qu’une belle infidflte une uduptation
der’ruftreure “bette efficuce”’;
(p) ‘deprecatory’ inverted commas to show the writer’s sense of superiority, in using a
word he woutd not rormatty use: e.g. ‘with its primary postulate, “steep” as it is,
me wilt not quarrel’ (Fowlre);
(q) using a ssord deliberately natsidr its nnrmal context 0f period or rrgiun, s.g.
‘Copernicus’s father war a “civil terr’art” of the time’;
(r) to indicate a new and not yet recognized term, nemantic translation/or a
translutinn label (e.g. ‘social advancement’ torpr’nmnrien ooeiule). If the term or
the tubet sticks, the invrrted commas cun Inter be withdrawn;
(s) tn indicate rrfcoerce—’the term “comma”’or ‘a word with an ugfis (“hypertensiIn

general, when a single word or phrute is pus in inserted commus, it can be

translated literutly, since the inserted commas relieve the translator of the responsibility
for its authenticity. However, where the word in inverted commas denotes a
frature peculiar to thesource language or irs culture, is may hr trunsetibrd, unit usrd
at an illustration (say, a slang word of no interest to the reader) it may hr emitted by
rho rranstaror.

Arywordusednutofsssnormalcontessorinuspeciat sensecar infactbepotin

inverted commas, and is often preceded by a word such as ‘alleged’, ‘catted’,
‘supposed’, noi-dioanf, 00g. (omitted in English if no emotive nuance is intrnded). The
 Purotuation 173

use of inserted commas can be abused by translators as it has often been by writers,
but up to now translators base not perhaps made enough use of this rosoorce.

Itranslator
base attempted to has
analyse ttohe prinvestigate
actice of italics, underltheining andpractice
inserted commasininallEnglihissh writlanguages.
ng. In German, a theme-word (Srichwos’t) is also often italicized. The
When a word is italicized to show that it is being used in a peculiar sense (e.g. ‘Die
Bakterieostiimme werden ausgeoiebt’), it can either be teanstuted literally, retaining
the inserted commas (“sieved out”), or normalized, removing the inverted
commas (fitteeed).

125. The exclamation mark

Au esclamatioo mark is used in English as a marh of(a) surprise; (b) strong personal
feeling and in particular, incredulity, sometimes anus ironical comment, on the part
of the author: e.g. ‘He (really) believes this!’; (c) strong recommendation, notably in
adveelisemeuls and general publicity; (d) emphasis, to draw attention to what the
author is saying; (e) address or apostrophe, e.g. ‘Robert! You coward!’; (f) a
command or request; (g) an interjection; (h) ruclamation; (i) ellipses, e.g. ‘If only he
had arrived!’

Inmost Western Eurupean languages it has the same semantic force. In German it is
also used in correspondence after the address formula and foe public notices (Keis
Zatriti!).

126. The questisn mark

to English the question mark is used to indicate (a) a question; (b) a rhetorical
question; (c) the introduction of a new subject often in a sub-heading; (d) conjecture
or uncertainty, sometimes in brackets after the particular word.
Rhetorical questions are more common in many foreign languages than is English,
and are frequently teansluted/conveened into statements.

127. The comma

The comma becomes critically important in the following cases:

(I) to distinguish (a) a non-eesteictive (‘The mar, whom I met yesterday’) from
(b) a restrictive relative clause (‘The man I met yesterday . .
(2) to separate all but the penultimate and the ultimate item in a list, e.g. ‘Sheep,
cattle and pigs were in the farm’: the comma is required after the penultimate
item in otherwise ambiguous cases, e.g. ‘John Brown, Cammel Laird, Vichees,
ard Harland & Wolff submitted tenders’;
(3) in German before a ‘daf’ clause, and sometimes when English would have a
174 Approaches to

Double commas in French have two special uses:

(5) to mean ‘and’ and ‘or’: e.g. Le traitement d’infeclions banales, ur’inaires, pulmonair-ea,
r-epondant a, ‘Treatment of common urinary or (and) lung infections
responding to.
(2) so signify emphasis or contrast: e.g. Ce tr-aitemenl, salalaire, eat appliqué, ‘This
treatment, which was brocticial . . . was applied’; Ce Ir-aitonsent, nuiaible, eat
appliqué, ‘This treatment, which however was harmful. was applied’.

128. Parenthesis

Parentheses are indicated in one of there ways: dashes, brackets and commas (doable
or comma—fall’stop(. Of these, dashes, which are least used, tend to
inlerrupt the flow of a sent ence conspicuously, and are often an indulgent irrelevance:
e.g. ‘So far it is true—and how far it is true does not count for much—it is an
unexpected bit of truth’, etc. (Note that dashes are used at beginning of lists in French
where English would base enumerations.)

Double commas enelone an important part of the sentence, ax in the iecc’nd sentence

Brackets arc aned (a) to ruclose, wish inverted commas, a direct quotation; (b) avon
alternative or equivalent version; (c) to enclose numerical or alphabetical enameralions
us here; (d) in mathematics and logic to indicate self-contained groups; (e) to
indicate, less conspicuously shun dashes or doable commas, a tactful, almost whisperrdpurenlhesis.
Notr the diffeeence heightened bybut not entirelydue to the different
word-group order between:

(F) ‘Faussercompagnie, Ic main mis a part, ann plantes dominunteo’, and

(F) ‘To turn our’s attention brusquely away from the dominant plants (maice
excepted)’.

In this sentence, dominuntes is put in italics usa sign of stress, to indicate a key-woed,
practice more common in French and German than in English punctuation.

Square brackets are not much used except in logic and by special ccoventicn.

129. Colons

When a sentence is logically (not grammatically) incomplete, and tequires an

explanation, an illustration or a list of itemx which it designates, it is normally
punctuated with a colon: thus the clause succeeding it in its implicit response, its
natural sequel. The first clause (the topic) frequently includes a word such as ‘the
following’, ‘there are’, ‘wruos’, ‘explain’ or an enprrn tier of quantity. The complement
is she analytical 00 synthetic comment on the preceding topic. The topic as it
were points to lbe ensuing comment.
 Punctuation 175

If the comment is analytical, the coton may be usefal to the transtator, since a tare
ward in the first otause will be esptained in the second, e.g. ‘II aperçat des furotes:
c’étaiert do petites flammes qui l’entoaraient’.
It the comment ss synthetic, lb ecolor shoeld assist the translator in following the
logical seqarnce of the SL lest, and where necessary reinforcing it: e.g. ‘Toute Ia misc
acne carnibre: cue nail, s’épanouil 01 meant; se noarissant drl’oeut’re qui tn
relIc Iranscendante’, The colon is implicitly an aluernatit’e to expressions like: ‘i.e.’,
‘tie.’, ‘scil.’, ‘that ix to say’, ‘lot example’, ‘I mean’.

130. Semieolimt

Semicolons are occasionally used to indicate a lofical and sometimes a formal/from.

relation between Iwo parallel srntrneon; the relationship may indicate
simttariiy or contrast, ‘I work; yox strep’.
Secondly, the semi-color is used to separate items in a series: e.g. ‘. . . irs sommrts
que sent te 20 acte do Ia Wulkyrir; tr rrnoux’ellement fubuleox dx role de Mime; irs 2
scènrsesquisesrt poignantes de Siegmund at Sieglinde; et tout Ic terrible Crdpuscute
des Dirux’.

Thirdly, the semi-colon is used to nhow continuity of thought orspeech, particularly in reported speech, the ful -stop indicating the end of Ihe repoeted speech.
Fourihty, semi-colons are sometimes used to murk off the subordinate clauses of tong eoptrn srntruer.
Text analysis

131. Discourse analysis or cohesion

Language has saeious eesoaeces to ensure the coheston of thosght beyond the
sentence, and the translator comes to rely on them as guide-Irons.

(a) Theme and theme. Theme states the subject of discouese, whscb a
nefereed to in, or togicalty consequential upon, the pensions uttenance (sentenco
ne paragraph). Rheme is the fresh element, the tesical predicate. tshtch otfene
infnematino about theme. (Within the steuctuee eta sentence, these lossoat teems
are sometimes enfereed to as topic and cnmment.) ‘Theme ptus theme’ need not
be a surface geammae sequence, and its identification still depend on a o’tdce
contest. Thus the sentence: ‘He discussed this subject’ is a togicat sequence tshtch
might be the basis foe a peeiphease such as, ‘This subject offered him the
opportunity he requited foe discussing it’. Lexically, ‘this subject’ is tho themo
and ‘he discussed’ the rheme, und theergore there isa cnnflict between the logical
sequence (‘He discussed thin subject’) and the mace cohouis’o ecatioation (possibly
‘This was the subject he discussed’) which the tnanstator may base to resotse; ho
may hose tn make a cnmprnmise between the basic logicat sequence, sic.,
animate subject animate seth inanimate dieect object, which is ctear and contestfree,and
asequence drterminedbyemphasisandcohessonfactors,whschmay
themselves be conflicting.

(b) Anaphor’io and oataphor’io t’efes’ence Anaphora. onosioting nf a deiottc deteeminoe

(the, this, that) or pronoun, refers tn something preciously mentioned, tshtlst
cataphnea (drictics, peonnuns or ‘dummy’ weeds such as ‘here’ in ‘here ts the
news’ or impersonat ‘it’ in ‘it’s interesting tn onte that, . . .‘ etc.) retees to what s
tn fottnw. Bath features are sometimes ns’erlnoked so translatson. to synthetic
languages they are s’arsousty inflected, and often base to be replaced by ‘full’
nouns when translated iota English.

(c) Enumerations (firstly, secnndly, or nest or then or afterwards, etc.).

(d) Opposition, nr dialectic. Argument proceeds from thesis to antsthesis, from
positive to negutise, from static to dynamic, from specihc to genetsc, and possibly
back in each case, or it may start with the negative to go on to the positis’e.
Occasionally, there is synthesis, or a neutral position is held. The oppositions may
be extreme (cnotruries) or kept close to the middle (conteadicronies). This is how
touch narratise ot all kinds is built up.
A translator has to be particularly sensitive to opposition; it often assists him in
detecting the sense of rare words, neologisms and tropes; via.: ‘II etait
176
 Tentaralysis 177

generalistequipeiofine smesures conomiques’.(Pea fine,‘isorksoutindetail’,is rop ositontogeteraliste.)‘I maniat desunitesfongiblesetnondesftreshamains’(‘dispos btocomponents’,contrasteda:ith‘ umanbeings).
‘Cost par eapport a oct10 notion d’entité paihologique iransitotre quo so pose to
pr000stic classiqoe: booffee isolee on entree dans to schizophrenieetquese discuto tof icacito ds traitement.’ Hece i,usu,ioir’eaudioolee (sysonyms) are tn
tppaaitian to ost000 dort, which totter in cataphontcatly captained scornal sentences
latcc. Hence: ‘We mast decide whether the disease is likely in be
short-lined before we make rho usual prognosis (isolated oatburst or incipient
schizophrenia) and discuss whether treatment will beeffectise.’
When seuleuces begin ‘on the one hand’, err r’eiancho, etc., the translator’s tasks
easy But hc oltcr has to detect implied contrasts realized by one wurd in italics or
iusertcd commas, or words such as ‘only’, ‘just’, ‘merely’, ‘equally’, ‘also’ and
other functional words that indicate contrasts, or comparalises of adserbs and
ad)ectioci which refer back to a precious statement, rot necessarily the last
sentence. The most delicate contrasts can sometimes be discor’ered only by
seizing the thought of rho whole passage.

(e) Redundancy. In isfocmulios theury, the nanction of redundancy is to counteract

noise. In a teal, redundancy may be bad writing, woolliness, etc. (asoiding
‘monologophobia’) which can be discreetly climinated by the translator. Howesec,
repetition, paraphrase, tautology and pleonasm (estesded redundancy)
can also be used to amplify, to clarify, to asoid false emphasis, to summarize, to
assist comprehension is the face of the ‘noise’ of obscurity, irrelesance or
cottoples thought. The translator has to detect the tautology before deciding
whether to transfer it to the TL; in the tnllowing sentence, the upening and
cfusing noun-phrases refer to the ending and the beginning of the same process:
‘La saturation des citIes oblige les principales entreprises a reconsiderer leuc
implantation dans les certres i’ummerciuus troditiorreis’, ard the iranstatur
surely has to clarify: ‘As many tuwns are saturated, the main firms are
re-esamining their policy of setting up in these traditional commercial centres.’
Again, any translator unacquainted with the refetence would be confused by
‘Palestine’s Arabs swore . . . to drench the soil of that tiny country with the last
drop of their blood in opposing any Big Powee scheme to partition the Holy
Land’.° Again, lb eec consecutis’e sentences beginning: ‘Mrs Barbara Castle .
The red-headed ren-driser . . . The Minister who sits for Blackburn lrat’elled
ace bad enough for an English reader, as Harold Esans has explained, and
masse for a foreigner.

(I) Czsjauctioru. These include all linking words, interpolated clauses and phrases,
distuncls,2’ enclitics. They arc oft en escessisely used by writers le establish a
colloquial style, the written cquicalent of ‘yea know’, ‘sect of’, ‘let me think’, aud
arc more frequently in normal use in French and German than in English. Often
they carry su little cugsitis’e infnrmatian (e.g. quei quit entoil) that a transfatur
may emit them.
178 Approaches to trarslatior

(g) Saboeitutioet. Ruqaaiya Hason (1968) han pointed out hot geammattcol end lesteol
words are used for cohesive purposes to refer to on object or person menttoned te
or the presious sentence. (This may hr stmply to avoid reprttttor.(
Typical, grammatical words are ‘the ocr’, ‘some’ ‘smdar’, ‘equat’, ‘tdenttcal’,
‘other’, which moy hose slightly cunceated anaphcetc refereeces. R. Hosan ltsts
lesicol weeds (generat nouns( such us ‘thing’, ‘object’, ‘bustness’, ‘affate’, etc. To
these must be added common words such an intealoautruc, dec Moeiondt’, ‘the

speaker’, intet’t’enlton, which may hate no equivalent tn the TL. Frequently the translator wil substitute the pro pee noun toe the antmate noun (e.g. Hen Gau.tltn
for dci’ Motiondt’) and the name of the object lot the general noun. General nouns
are usually marked by determiners such as cc, us tel, eolehe, etc.
(h) Compat’aticeo. A comparison is alma ys used cohesively. Thus a sentence begtnsing
‘Dee mehe elliptische ischfmische Bereich liegt mtt dem Zentrum. das
immeramslärkstrn in Mitleidenschafl gezogen ist, im mittleren Vorderarmdeittel’
(‘The ischaemic section, which howet’er is elliptic, is in the centre which is always
most strongly affected, in the middle third of the forearm’) refers the reader back
to the presious sentence to hod an adjectise denoting geometetcal shape
contrasted with elliptic.
(i) Initial negariceo. These are customarily a signal that thete corresponding pontives
wilt follow, not nnly in contrasts such as ‘rot . . . but . . .‘, ‘neither . . . nor’, but
in many passages beginning with a negative statement, sometimes ironically.
A translator haste look for cohesise terms ilhe cannot account toe lbe sense of an
item within its immediate (micro’)conlesl. If he notes a cohesive teem or its
puzzling absence, he has to look beyond the sentence or paragraph he does not
anderstand at the maceocontest, the whole passage. The following is an instance
ef cataphoric reference which cau be detected because of the lack of logical
sequence betweensculptut’e and cnWronnemenr: ‘Malaval passe avec aisance dela
peintaee on de Ia lithographic ala sculpture, a l’envieonnement ou a l’animation
dan lien public.’ Three columns latre, this Noucel Obnercateut’ article goes on:
‘Matavat asait detaissé Ia prinluer pour prnjrler an aménagement et pour des
recheeches sue l’envieonnement el ‘animation par Ic son.’
Theertore, the first sent encr could perhaps hr translated: ‘Malaval moses easily
from painting or lithographs to sculprurr, and then to the designs for the setting
and saandinstallation of a place of public entertainment.’
(j) Punctuation. A powerful cohesive factor (see Propositions, nos. 124—130).
(k) Most SL ‘heretical queotionn become statements in English. English needs fewer
connectises than other languages. French and Italian use hyphens to indicate

132, Translatinn terms

It is characteristic ef the still amateurish state of our art that we are burdened with
such inaccarate and inadequate terms as ‘toanword’ (e.g. détente, t’appeochement)
 Text analysis 179

and ‘loax-teanslation’ (e.g. ‘ceases of state’, ‘National Assembly’). Is it too late to

peopose that they be neplaced by ‘transceibed n’oed’ (on ‘adopted stord’ or ‘adoption’)
and ‘theoogh-teanslatios’ eespectis’ely?
Wider questions

133. The impregnability of a language

The translator is in the best position to appreciate the ‘total’ dtffeeence between one
language and another. He himself usually knows that he cannot write more than a trw
comples sentences in a foreign language without writing something nnuatural and
non-native, any more than he can speak one. He witl be ‘canght’ every time, not by his
grammar, which is probably suspicioasty ‘better’ than an educated native’s, not by his
vocabnlaey, which may welt be wider, but by his unacceptable or improbable
eatlocutions. Again, this ‘total’ difference appears when two passages are compared in
a field such as medicine where the lexis of the two languages is close; the following
French collocations chosen at random, for instancr are suspect in English: ucticité
oymptomuriqae; action oedarice; unxiéré den poychoseo; d litre pur’emest rymptomatiqae;
litre machf oar Ir oymprome; structure d’intérêt biologique; eothérique isdtaotrtelle.
A foreigner appears logo on making collocationul mistakes however tong he fives in
his adopted country, possibly because he has never distinguished between grammar
and lesicology. An educated native will also make mistakrs in collocatioa, particularly
if he is under the inguence of interference, but hr will correct himself intuitively.
Sprachgefuhl means awareness of collocutions. For the above reasons, translators
rightly translate into their own language, and afor’riori, foreign teachers and students
are normally unsuitable in a translation course.

134. Etymology

A knowledge of etymology can sometimes be as useful lou translator as to a language

learner. (Incidentally, the discipline of translation could be described us tangential to
that of language learning.) For difficult words, etymology may supply him with a
‘bridge’ word Intake him to the TL meaning; thus for a German-speaking translator,
the ‘bridge word’ foe (tt)ghiou is girunes. The whole point of learning etymology into
associate and distinguish former meanings of a word, not to confuse them with the
present meaning.

135. The uses uf translation

Far from bring old-fashioned, a relic of classical education, etc., the ability
translate should be one of the main aims of a foreign language learner. Acquiring Ike
four ‘macrosktlls’at (ocular and auricular comprehension, oral and graphic composilion)
is essentially a selfish and self-centred activity. If the linguist is to have asocial
function, hr has to ‘transfer’ his skills. This interlingual transference (I choose the
inn
 Widee qenstinen 181

teem as a sapeeoedinale or geeecic teem) inclttdes all actistttes tncols’tng the transfee of
sense teem one faegaage to anothee, including paeaphease, summaey, peects, espfanalien,
absteacting, definition, simaltaneons, censecutese ad hoc and lose-may tnlerprelotion
as melt as publication and information translateon. All these octlsltles may hose
somelaterplaceasin feraeitneegtdae
language learning—Ircx’ision
think translat oand
n ts asetconsolidation
ul tnt tal y to cnsnreundeestapeocedure—hat
nding mhen cot entice explanationthey
tn a classrace
oom snotpetmanily
possehle, and
actisities peactsscd foe the benefit at thied parties. The more Important enternattnnal co-operation, compromise and agreement to disatree becomes, the treater the
‘teansfer ing’ linguist’s (Spe-achmileter’a) r sponsibilt y. The more people go abroad, the more the linguist can help them to profit teem and enjoy thete stst . Hts job or
is to translate. It mould be ironical it the practice et translatton mere net a
cetopunent of his training.

136. Thr calt of ambiguity

The linguistics literature is tee full et artificiul aotbiguuusesamples. Esru mitheut the
contest in a general statement a translator mould nermally assume that ‘the police
merr told tu step drinking’ max an rsample uf defretivr syntax, since puller mould be
mere likely In be engaged in tightiog aleehelism; therefore, in threry, the centrxt
cenflicts with the syntax, esen though the pelice in this country cannot step anyone
drinking (unless after hours!); again in ‘Flying planes can be dangerous’ (Chemsky),
the gerund sense is mere likely than the participle. Again in ‘If the baby doesn’t thrice
on rum milk, boil it’, the translator muuld ser on semantic ambiguity, but mould
eliminatr the grammatical ambiguity in his translatien.
Homrver, the translater ts only coneernrd milk such unnatural sentences mhen he is
translating a bank en linguistics. He is probubly more cuocrened milk lexical than mith
grammatical ambiguities, unless hr is dealing mith the uncenscious or deliberate
ambtguettes uf an authnr’s thinking. In a sent ence sueh as ‘II est inutile d’insistersur
Irs tableaus eliniques’ rendering as, ‘It is unnecessary to dram attention tu the clinical
patterns’ (because they are impurtant), ‘It is unnecessary to dram attention In the
clinical patterns’ (because me hose plenty ef ether infurtnation) and ‘It is useless to
attach empnrtance te . . . etc. one has there oppnsrd translations mhich may or may
net be clarified by the ceutest.

137. Translation criticism

Translateen criticism is applied translatien theery. It has fise purposes:

(a) to improse standards of translution;
(b) to preside an object lessen fee trunslatnrs;
(c) to threm ltght en ideas about translalinn at particular times and in particular
subject-areas;
(d) to assist en the :nlerpretation of the murk of significant mritern end significant

(e) to assess critically semantic and grammatical differences between SL and TL.
182 Approaches to translation

Translation criticism has four basic procedures:

(1) to analyse the intention, prcdomicanl language function, tone, themes, register,
stylr (syntactic and lexical), literary quality, cultural features, putativr readership
and selling of the SL test, and to propose an appropriate lranslaliou rnecltod,
(2) so make a drtailrd comparison brtncren the SL and TL lrxl, noting all significant
srmantic, stylistic, pragmatic and idrological differences (either in the whole TL
test or in random passages);
(3) to assess the diffrrrncrs between the total impression of the SL and TL text,
including in particular their interpretations of the subject-matter;
(4) to evaluate the teauslation.

The third procedure is often neglected: while the exposure of mistakes (in eelatiou to thrfLtestandthefactsofthematter,aswellastheTLstyleOcdrefistee)i5
important, this procedure is helpful only in relation to the translator’s interpeetutton
of the test.

I should add that translation criticism is an exercise of intelligence aud imagination,

and isonly partially objective: Harris’s (1975) attempts to quantify mistakes are futile,
and both Reiss’s (1977) and House’s (1977a) categorizations are too rigid. (Kollee
(1978) and Newmark (1973) have previously criticized Reiss’s misunderstanding of
form’strrssed tests.)

138. Etyasmlogy sad treaslation

Ever since Bally (1932), who reacted so violently against it, etymology has been the
whipping.boy of linguistics. Even Lyons (1977) who is always so careful to combine
the traditiunalistwith the nltramodem, writes ‘The etymologyof a lexeme is irrelevant
to itscurrent meaning’. The remark has some truth ‘operationally’, but if one wants to
understand a ward properly one must know something of itt history.

A translator may require a knowledge of etymology, which is a branch of linguistic

‘science’, for the following reasons:

(a) to assess the meaning of a current SL word, which may bra neologism, common
mord, or archaism in the language clock of a writer over a life span of up to eighty

(b) to discover the core and peripheral meanings of a word in a test written in a
previous period;
(c) so detect and/or encourage the revival of previous nenses of words, as many good
writers have done;
(d) to understand the development of languages and cultures in relation to the testn
they have to translate;
(e) so famihanze himself practically and genre ally with cognate woed-eelatiocs, and
the development of meaning, thus ‘sensitizing’ himself to the technical traps of
such words as dme, tour, utile, oreille, élément, métier, 000pir, truculent, Muller,
etc—the surprises in the last lines of dictionary-entries.
 Wider questions 183

Provided that no one goes on teying to identify the teue’ (etymo-) meaning of asvoed
o’ith its cattiest oe one of it seartter tenses (n’htch wan the cause of the troable in the
schools and the pothee among the stractueal lingaists), teanslatoes and langaageteaenees
can onty peofit feom a stady at etymotogy.

139, Laagnage, naltare and translation

A tangaago is partty the eeponitory and reflection ot a cattaee. Passtbty, the mast
ancient featuees of thecuttaee tie in the aspects of geammae atsoctated with enttttes
(nouns) such as animate inanimate, mate femate and animut/haman/divine, wtth
peocesses (seebt), such as time (peenent patt/futnee; durative/momentary;
peageessise/hahituat eepetitive static dynamic/pnnctuut/pe;fectise impeefective), and
with deicticn (peonouns), such as space (here there, near/far, etc., in relation to the
topic). The featuees ot past cuttuers remaining in the tesis of a langnagr are mace
drtuited and numerous, and usually ma re recent and transitory.
Literat transtation can theow tome tight on the relation between one language and
another, and one language and its antecedents (earlier nut dr tongue). It is also a toot
ininteeculturul comparison. but the main evidence mm tentsand informants, not in
the language. Language is full of dead metaphors and symbols (e.g. ‘sunrise’), and
cultural historians have to find out when they become dead. Hence the wrakness, as
has been pointed oat, many times, 0f Wharf n thesis which relies on indiscriminate
literal translation. Many metaphors, however, are stilt latent and can be revived (‘I
weighed it up in my own scalr’)—hence the element of tenth in Wharfs thesis. Other
features of language are anisersal, and some cultunat elements appear to became
universal (e.g. the sun is no longer regarded as animate, divine or having a gender,
but as an object in a maturity and an increasing numberol cultures).
A knowledge of etymology isossentint in translating documents: in purtienlar to
determine whether words are being used in their literal, figurative, symbolical or a
new technical sense.

Logical thonglstprocesses ace reflected in grammar rather than lexis, and they are
ctear uf the metaphorical elewrnt in language; as knowledge grows, grammar
becomes relatively culturefeee and universal. Imaginative thought-processes, reflected
in the lenient elemrnt of language, make use of and recerair metaphors, and
are relatively culture-bound, but always with personal and universal elements.
A translator faced with creative writing has to weigh the universal, cultural and
personal elements against each othrr.

140. Translation and language teaching

‘The chief defect of the now universally condemned “Grammar Translatiun Method”
was that it used bad grammar ard bad translation’ (Catford, 1965).
No, st was oat the chief defect. The chief defect was that the method left little or so
time for unythinf else—on the whole, bad grammar and bud translation werr all that
was taught. Tbe resnIt wan that few people learned a speak or write nr translate;
184 Approaches to trasslatius

hess leat’oed to read and appreciate literature, though it was also the o’i’ong kmd of
literary appreciation. Needless to say, there were exceptions.

Remains the qoestion of translation’s place in language-teaching. In a haste foe-year

school coarse, say aged 10-15, where one assomen corefat progression and graded
tests, the main poepose is to teach the intealingual skil s reading, listening, speaking, ssniting (not in chronological order), and the cultore The place of translation is
subsiwaydiaryishotostensively
important, unless the te(pointing,
acher prelers directpictures,
method. No one shoulslides,
d attemptetc.),
to learn anyhutnew ititemthat
without undercannot
standing whatbethdone
e item means:clearly
the ideal
and qoickly (and usually it cannot) it should be through a quick iranslutioo before the
word or sentence is inteenaliced. Secondly, brief translations from native to foreign
language aerate gal in consolidation and testing of spoken and written foreign
utterances: the eneecises should consist of basic grammatical teausposittons and
one-to-one lexical translations combined with other forms of consolidation and testing
related to contest and situation. In this four-year course, written translations of any
touter language test with much unfamiliar material that haste be looked up in
dictionaries or grammars is a monte of valuable time. If the reading skill is beinf
trained somewhat separately through readers, a little oral translation is usually
necessary, hot questions on the tests (often simple) and later discussion should be in
the FL. After the four- year course, the position changes. The social language skills.
viz, oral and spoken translation into and out of the foreign language, can then be
trained. Fleer, the translation into English should be challenging and dillicult (it is as
much a Irstof English and otintellifence asof the FL), whilsttrunslation from English
should be realistic, e.g. notices, criticism, reports, letters, etc., written in straightforward
modern language—not the aetigicial type of passage sometimes used in A-level
to test difficult grammatical points or oh score vocabulary. Again, translation plays an
essential part in the reading courses (fur general tents) which should start at any age
after 16.

In my opinion, the basic four-year course is not the place or time ot exercises in
cnnteastisr analysis nor anyeoncenteated attempt to eliminate interlerence for its own
sake, although in a larger sense language-teaching is basically an attempt to eliminute
this interference. On the other hand, Ido not question the value of Dodson’s bilingual
method (1967) toe those teachers dedicated to it (s.f. my attitude to the direct
method). Language-teaching method is linked to the teacher’s persooality Faulty
methods can he exposed, leasing a wide choice of sound methods.

141. Translation as an academic esercise

The cultural sulue of teonslotion issometimes questioned, since many students tend in
feel that translation has little justification as an academic discipline.

Culture has atleast two disünct senses, and translators, like linguists, tend to think ofit
us the sum of a people’s customs, peoducts and ways of thinking. However, I am now
referring to culture as high culture, or as intellectual development.
 Wider questions 185

My sheet anssver moulasd bemeltthat notonto

only aretheall thnvtIcetandic
ng tntel ectual andSagas,
aettst c culbuttures heavimany
ly tndebtofed the
to translftnest
ation—taketsrttees,
our debt to Grtheeek, Romanpoetsand Artnahtc
particular have teanntated and ssritten about teanslatton. Amongst Geeman wrtters,
the tine steetches from Goethe, ssho translated Diderot and svrote much about translation, through the Romantics and the Symboltsts (notably Rtlke and George( to
Beecscarcely
ht and BOlt. InanEnglaimportant
nd, sue perhaps stoEnglish
et isith Chooses’ors ‘RoocAmerican
e’, s ht st the matepoet
eighteentsince
h-century strthe
es is onVtctortann
Deyden and Pope; astsho
George has
Stetrer hannotnatd,alto
these ts
been a translator—one thinks particularly of Joyce, Graves and Auden. Because
poetry uniquely uses all the eesoueces of language, tt has otten been constdered
untranslatable, yet the translation ogpoetry is almost asold and as flourtshtng as
poetey itselg.
Hossevee, up to non’ I have produced evtderce toe the cultural value ol teanslatton
mithout aesmering the question. I believe that translation ts an escepttoeally dtfftcult
and challenging esercise; that it demands inlinite curiosity and about things as melt as
mords, requires the consultation otpeople as melt as books; that it is collaborative, but
finally is usually the eespoenibility of one person; that it varies trom the most abstruse
inquiry about the symbolic meanings of roses or acanthuses (Cooper, 1978; Green-
assay and Marsh, 197f( to the most mundane and all too common misprint or single
ievreled commas; that Its a splendid esercise tn setting one’s one language;
stylistically many translations cue be made better, more relevant, more lucid, more
‘classical’ than their originals; at the same time, it is the most scientific 0f literary
eseecises, requiring reasons go revery sentence, atssays subject to the back-translation
lest, mhich is itself only evidence, not infallible, being applied usually to primary
meanings only; thus if Wolfgang Doeppe translates Richard Aldington’s ‘We sat
together in the trench’ as, ‘So hockrrn ssir im Schittoengrahon’, he has to give reasons
for hockree rather than tattoo, and it is not necessarily ssrorg.
Nothing demonstrates the complesity ot language, and of specitic tests, more vividly
aedesplicislythas translation. Further, nothtngcsposesgood tvrittng and bad isriting
so nakedly as translation. Bad sseittng is bad niriting in any language, and ishat oouedo
impressive in language X or Y may indeed be more clearly shone up as rubbish in
language Z. In this seese, translation could be regarded usa relutation olary relativist
theory of language.
I have spoken 0g the ‘active’ element in translation, It is important as a source of
diffusion of keotsledge of every kind. By understanding the development ol every
kind of culture in other civiltoations, tsr have also enriched the understanding ol our

Translation is esactieg, and must be esact. Provided the original is not dreary and I
have to admit that a trivial or diffuse original is hardly north translatteg, ard there is
no doubt that computee translation (Laivsoe, 1979( is making progrcss nith simple
tests—translation na superb academic esercise, particularly isheo it is combised ssith
translation criticism, and discussion, Ii offers a particular insight into the eature of
language as melt as contrastive linguistic and cultural studios. As ar academic
esercise, the sublect is only at its beginning. I have had a student doing a comparison
186 Apprnanhes to

of English Dante translations and soar our ts dootg a dtssortatson on ‘Teonslatton as

ldeologicalAppeopeiation’ banedonvatiousteanslatiossofRousseau’s500talCoott’ad.
Iwas recently in Finfand and proposed research on translations of pubhctty matertal;
in the hotel I stayed at, a leaflet recommended the bar as a place foe meeting a lot of
gay people. I emphasioe that this sabject offers teemendons scope for post-graduate
research. One aspect is not unlike the estraordinary position in art crtltctsm at
present: just as art historians are discocertug that many paintings hare been 6alsely
attrtboted to great masters, so I think we shall hnd that much misinterpretation of
foreign literatures, in particular Russian, nests on consistentmistranslation. It must not
be forgotten that the more difficult a tent is, the more a translator has to interpret.
Again, a woethwhilr academic ruercise.

Lastly, I must sterns that whilst poetry is a special case, technical or institutional
translation is often just as, if not more, challenging and rewarding than literary
translation. In England, we still have the remnants of on evil tradition that scorns
trade, rngtnrrnng, manufacturing, hand work, practical details in fanour of Latin and
Greek stndtrs, knowledge for knowledge’s sake, and idle speculative theorioing: this
‘translates’ nb the guise notton that technical tronslation is easy and boring because it
ts concerned with an exact international intrrtraoslatabfr language, mere
taral serbahsm’, whilst litreary translation alone is worthy of an academic’s time and

st(iargon,
ady. Nothing coulnon’srqatturs,
d br more misguided. Whenrtc.),
a non-litr athe
ry piecedemands
is well writ en, it oftare
rn prosrnsometimes
ts thr same demands aseven
literary tragreater.
nslation, and whenMoreover,
it is poorly writ en
rqaally rtch tn vartoas levels of metaphor, which is the central problem
Technical translation

142. Whoa generic becomes specific

When a g eric term (hypreonym, Obrr’brgs’if ) is collocalrd as an alteruatcouccsf itsspecific terms (hyponyms, Urner-begs’if e), it is forced to lose as genenc sense and to
take on another of its specific subordinate senses. Thus ‘Le dn’eeticule de Meckel n’a
dane Ia majurité des cas aucune traduction clinique on pathologsque, et sadecoaveete
mt toetuite au canes d’une laparotomir’. ‘tn mast cases, the presence of Meckel’s
diverticutum is not shown by any clinical or pathological rs’idence, and it s only
detected accidentally daring a taparotomy.’ ‘Pathological’, tbeoeetically a
term covering all disease, is contrasted with ‘clinical’ (patients signs and symptoms)
and is narrowed to diagnosis by laboratory tests, Xray esaminations, etc.

143. Clarity nr brenity: a serb problem

Teanstaturn have to make their own decision whether to encourage, tallow or
the genre at tendency in the jaegons toe verbs to be swallowed up in adjectives, nouns
and adverbs. Any criterion of style, purity, etc., is mainly subtective (on the
Vor’nteltung level), but provided the selfespeessive function is not dominant in the
test, the translator is justified in making the transposition (transposing!) if the test
becusnes ctnarcr: ‘Sa découverte nécensite t’ruameu dun melee de gefle’. ‘To detect
it, one mast esamine about a meter 0g the small intestine’. ‘L’arsénal inlervestiunnistr
actuel en resume l’historiqae’. ‘The present stock of methods for treating it
in itsetf constitutes an account 0g the disorder’.

144. Grammar e, Lesis

Not infrequently, a language’s synonymical resources are richer and subtler in its
grammar than in its tesis: a smooth collocation therelore requtres a displacement of
grammar rather than lexis. Thus in, ‘Le medicin, en consaissaut Irs inconvdnirnts de
certains antibiosiques avec Irs retasants munculairen utilicés en aucslhésie, cssayrra
deviser ‘administration de ces ansibiosiques’, one has a choice between varying en
connai,suant (a) grammatically (as because since he knows, knowing, with a knowledge
of), (b) texically (knowing, being aware of, conscious of). The grammar, or a
grammaticatlteuical combination, often offers greater possibilities.

145. British and American English

Fur a British English translator, the main problems are caltural rather than linguistic
after hr has mastered the spelling traps in technical words (clue oe, ae, a few k’s for
188 Approaches to

c’s). Qseotiaoo d’mtet’oat goes ‘straight’ ioto American English as irstes’nship problems
(matters, difficulties), hut ‘A hossemao’s’ or ‘hoaoemanship’ has the wrong connotations,
and ‘medical training in hospitals’ may be a more suitable label in British
English.
Notes to propositions

M J Lggd Lgt N
(M 4-

iH4: th [d ‘fl4- h lI!i!i th th’d ‘dOg fppti), b

(bHy, frgihty, uk, Th u[d ‘d0g

S R. 04-uk, S. Guuuubuuuuu, 0 Luuuh uuudJ. Suuutuuk, Guuf.uuuuuuuupuy Euughuh, Luguuuuu,

uSuuDiuAufgubudusUbu,sutuuuu(EuuuyiuDu.uPuubkuuudusUbuuuuuu,ud H J.Stuuug,p 166)

11 H. Ruud, Eug4-hpuuu suyk, Bull, p. 158.

Stuudhk’u tuul 4- fuuuuu hiu C upduuu€ (24 Muy 1843) ‘Luu uleuuuuuu d’luuuu quu )‘u

189
190 Notes to peopositions

It bilhootosn otlolo, bnotoop too IqnoIo, a tholoto oltololto (It , It).

(o) 000gooilol bilhooioss, do 10 dioIoono hoololobool

(b) noel bdhenooos (ohoh tooth into oooo000), do 10 othiIoo,o olentololon (11)

Clotted 000fliol 1 to doelnoloooely, Rootlodgo sod Kogeo Psot, 1959, P. 7.

9 the toot ceo splotod to ho ioooloobto Gnonooon of 000teponony Egtoh by R Qoik, S

dnfondtoO O.K Heetoeoo’soodF C. Stok’sDioooooyofltsogoogoodlogooooApphd5ooo

Ito to CILT VeoghooJotoosoodS. Root, Sooty of oonnioolo oodponfonoooooo ot otodot

Bibliography

:
Boliogos, D. (1965) ‘Ths Nlioo of oosg’ o Lo.ogoogo 41
Booth, A D. (1967) Moohitts tooolttttott, Nooh-HoII.od, Aototssdsttt
Btodsl, F. (tstt1totd by M. Kooho) (1967) C !ottoott tt,islk otpt6tlbsos, Atottod Colts, Potts.

BtookotRoso, C (1958)A gotottos oftstotttphoo, Sookos & Wosboog, Loodost

Btihtot, K (1934) DtsSpst.ohthoot’to, Filohos, toot (2Nd odtt. 1965 Stoogts)

Btttloo, 0. (1977) IlogItotI Loottos, Usootoltty of Both (ottpotbhohod).

Cottostd, IC. (1965)A hsgtoittto thoosty of stolooott, Osfood Utoossoty Pstsot, Losdos

Coils, P. (otottoiotsdby C Mtddlstos) (1972), Posgtttot E ps,otp006, Pssgttts900kt, HostsosdoooOh

Chototoky, N. (1965) Aopot3o of ho thooty of tytttot, Mootoshosotlo Isolilots of Tsdssoiogy Psoot,

Chotstoky, N (1970) Roflooooso Os losgtotgo, Totstpio Stttifb/Fostoso, Losdos

Cobb, B. (i969(Atoottdtdosttiy, Oofotd UsjsotoityPtott,Losdos.

Cobbott, A. (1965)A hotosy of sodost Ftostoo, Poijoos Bookt, Hosstosdtsoslh
Cooks, 0. (1959) Tholottgoogo ofsoooo, Oofotd Ustootoity Ptoto, Otototd
Coopos, I C (1978) tlhoootod o,toydopoodto of tsodtttottoloysobolo, Thttoot & Hodoos Losdos

Cooositt, E. (1978). Wtsdtttttko (1978)

COok, M (1976) Eopioooioto to lootgtotgo otd sotootttttg, Moloby Ptstt, Lottdos

Ctotststsg,R. 0 sd) (1968) Th€ph:looophy of Jotttt PottlSooloo, Molhttss, Losdos

Dtgttt, M. B (1976) ‘Cot tttotophoo bo ttttttlttod” Bobo! ,oot (1)22 23
Dohtssdotf, B (1969) COot otd ooflot ttt ott tttdtooo’otltOosly, Roottlodgo otd Kogot Pool, Losdot
Dotboittot, I (1977) ‘Nttoooo do it tstodttot,ott,’ Bttbol,t,tiit (1) 6—17
Dsosdo,J.(oosstotsd byA Bott)(i978(Wt’tiittgotddtffotottoo,Roottsdgoood Ksgott Pod, Loodott

191
192 Biblisgoaphy

Dsydos I

Esoposo, 45 (1951) Tho oooosoo of ooooploo ssod,, Chsllo & Wsodos, Lsosdso
Essoopooss C sossosoos Gbooooy (1974) (F E)51h sd8., Co oslofThs Esoopooo 05955505!
Eoaos H (1972) Nssoosoooo Eog&oh, Ho11, Rsosshssl & Wsosloo, boo Yos
Esoso Psb045d E E (1975) Thso,ooo ofpoooolo’s ool,g , Clssoosdos PSOOO.

Foooooolo, F (1977) ‘Poly so ol ,selap6050’ so L Gooa(od ), Thosoy osdpooooooofooososlosoo, Lood,

Fosgs,G (1960)’Soosoodo5f’iOP.GOo5h5dM Blook Tooooboofshoph,loosphsoolssooogsof
Fosod S (Oasslalsd by A A Boll) (1916) W2 sod 40 0014900 0 lbs sooo,o, T. Fsohoo Uooos
F9sod, S (os,ololsd by I Sosohoy) (1976) Jokso sod bob olsoooo 10 Mo oo00005 Psogooo Books,

Folios, F. (1973)A hoodbookfoo oooololoso, C. Sssylhs, Gsooodo Coo

Gooksbs, H. (1971) Zso Woofdddioksooosoo, Fosk, Mosiob

Gssths,J.W (1826)SooIlsOhOW€sko,s91 39)btooo toThoosasCaslyb) PsopylsosEdslsoo,Moot,h, 1909

GoospHs (1975) is P P Gigltoli (od), Laogstogo oodSootd 03-soot, Posgoss, Hasstoodssosth.

Gssssaoay, K., osdi. Mssth (1978) Ths sllsootsooodlaogssago sfjfossst, Masdooold sos Loodots
Gsffssos (1975) is P P Goglsolt sd.), Loogstogo sod SooolCossos, Pssgsoo, Hooss,sdssooh

Hoss, W. (1902) ‘Tho thossy of toosolatsos’ is G H. R. Pasksssos)od(, Tho shoooyofsoooo,og, Oslood

Hdliday, M A K. (1973) Esplooassoso so ohofsosos005 of lasgssogo, Edoosod AssoId, Losdoo

Hoods, B (1975) ‘Nofaltos sod odos los osfossasios sosgososos is tsossls6oo’ Moo 20(3) 184—93

HoOssoso, P sod H. Voossy (1970) Spooohsoooosohajl sod Ubos’ssooo, Hosboo, Mssooh

Hastsosss, B B K aodF C Stosk)1972(Dsosooo’yoflsosgsoogoasdliogsoisssot, ApplsdSoissooPoblsshoos.

Haoas,B)968)G ooo,ootsooloohossooooopoksosods’s’isooEoglohl(PsogssooossssLisgosstsosoodLaogssgs
Tsathisg, Papos 7), Lsstgtsas, Lssosdoo.
Hslbsg,G (1977)’Pastskolssoddlokstoosaso fodskatossoss Dsalog’,DossisoholtFos,odspooohol)1977)30.44

Hooso, I )1977a)4 osodolfoosooodoooo qoolssy 050000001, Gootso Nao, Tobsogoo

Hooso, 1. (19776) ‘A tsodol ls assossog 6asdsssoo qstaloy’, Mso 22(2) 103—9.

Hogso8 0. sd.) (1934) Posoo aolhologopoooqtso dot Stoo’dsoltooo, odotos 1 090601, Paso
Hosoboldo, W. s. (1816) Esslsstoog ost Ago000so000: sos Stosg (1963).
 B)b1199lphY 193

Jopd(, RW)1969)D0Ub069g99194fd1h9d0th901h99L19L06g699-99d(

Kod, 0 (1968) Zofol( 06d G6o€lol06oolgko( o do’ Ubo’oooo9g, VEB V9911g E9oykIopodlo, L91p61g
9-pp V (Id ) (1974) Ubo’ o’ood D019961ho’, Qo9116 & M6y99, H6,dllbo’g
Kl(o, 1 1. o,dJ A Fodoo (1964) Th 99-909 096909649(o9h909y’ 9J A Fodo9lldJ 1 K90(d

Koflo’, W. (1972) GlOldpIobk9o’ do’ Ubo’9o,go9ho’1’o, F119k6, 690196

Ko,o1909o9, V H. (1973) S(oo’ opo’o’od€, M01600

Ld0666, V (9979)’T,go’90d polo’ blIll 991911169g sod ho o’lpo90o’, I900Ipo06lld L19g4o’, 18(3)

Lodloo’, M (1976) Syoo’doql 9pod409,09 (ElIdlI dl L,lgolllqol Appliqoel 24), Did,69, P494
L9996,E )1966)’Ao’o’lollogooo’o’d9o’bsllboo”19E H Ll9llblog(ld.),N09do’l09090lolhlolody

LIloIblog, 6. H. (1967) Tho b,olog,401fo19d19,09 OfllOgllgl, WIlly, NIl Yolk

L461-Sosos1, C )99s951s96d 1669 ((1966) Thl 111’l9 9999d, WIldIoflld & 9906(106, Loodoo.
Ldli-Stsslls, C (1974) )99191I199d by CHill Ilkobsol od B900kl Go’odfllt SIhOIpI) So’469o’ll

Llo,9, S R (1977) Thloo’919994 Of?99911h09, 10661 Hopkiol UllIlolIty P9916, Bllloooool

LIly, 0. (1969) Do 11160690066 U0€P909019g, 516591499, F916k990.
Lloo’, D (1979) ‘9-st 0600616—19996 lllgolgo,’ (.1999 Moooo, 1,50-57, D46d96.
Loblookoys )OlolIslld by B P6966) (1968) F,oph 4912649099, Cllbldgl U61990199y Polls, Cltob9,dgl.
L19h90, M (153)) Sl9db,’of ‘099 Do1ooooh€o: 196 Stoo,g (1963)

Lyols, 1 (1972) ‘Holso IlIglIlgI’ OR A HiodI (Id), Noo’lo’boloolloooollo9, RoysI So6649y lId

Lyoss 1. (1976) ‘Stooot,ollillI i9 hogoisbos’ 9999. Ro66y (Id), Spoobo’o(o,o 49 1991’odOObol, C(1999do9

Mollot, J. (1969) Lo 9’1d009909 lol9bflqol 19969999406, Eyoollls, P5995

Mglblllo, A (1961) Soylooqol oo9opolIIl dofrooclo lIdS l’116409419d, D,dot, P611

MsOool, A. (1964)99199194 of glolI’llllogoiOOlll, Fobto, L09d06

Ms9os8, 0. (1953) Loo o’Elhods soIoioo!ogo, D,dilo, P161
M019Igo, A. (1966) Ths 69190069 of 060699g, Rspp & WEllg, L09d09
Molds, C S (1955) S,goo, H9googl ood 649-oiooo, P919190-HIll, EoglIoood Cl,11s, Nd
Motto, C 9,1(1971) Wobogo 09 Jo g€o€ol 14ooy of ogo’ )Apptolohls 90 Soo’o6os(, Mootos, 166

Moottist, 99. (1955) LSl 669165 iofid&s, Cshots do Sod, Psñs.

Moosis, G. (1964) Lo tttoo9io II 9oldtlO’6: 94109,6 do’ poblettos liogoiooqto€s, Mootos, ito Hsgost
194 Bi6lIlogoaphy

k P P 1973) 19 oo,14691 B,,bol 91)3—19

Noooo4,k.P P (1976) A oploI0001llIdlOl. ThoAoodoo VooolL000l0001J100’001114(3) 161 9

N,do F A (19746) T,4o9,690 ,o 6 Sohook ),d ), Coooool o,Odo 0 hogooo601, ,ol 12, Mooooo Tho

NAo CA (1975o) Cooopo’oo’olooloooll o of o,ooo,og, Mooloo, Tho 616441 NAo. C A ( 9756) Loogoogo, oloooCl0000 ood 000olol oo (ooooyooIoo1d by A S. 61,1), Slolbgld U0l0’00419y
Nldo CA. (1977) Po,olooog g 0400oooool1060g (oopoblohod)
N,do F A oodC Tob (19b9)Thogoodpooo6o ofoooolooog,BoIl,L”d’o
Nooooh,, F (1892) 119 Sloog (1963)

Nood,1 (1798): ow 910114 (1963) Noooboog, 0 (1978)’Sloog. ooogo-ooodoiooo ood I’o,bioooo doogoo’ ,o Popoo,fo’ooo 1h0p0000150000 ho
Ooogo yGooool. 1 (1937) Mooooo y o,pkodoo dolo lOOdoo0000 wo Slooig (1963).

Pooo, 61 (1971) Wo1goooloio (Fo1ooo Modow Mooloof, Loodoo.

Poow, C S (1934) Cgllo,od popo,9. Hoooold UooooooOy Poogs. Cowbodgo, Moos.

Pooood, E (1934) Ao ABC ofooodo,g, Fobo,, Loodoo.

Poohlooo, A S (00091lOlOd V Nob64go) (1964) Eogooo Ooog,o, Bolhogoo, No Yyok
Qoow, w.v. (1959) Moooiog od ,000lOy,g9’ oR. A. Boooso)ool (,Ooo ,o,olol,oo, Hooogod Uwoowly

Qo,oo, w v (1960) Wood ood 08(102, Mo,swhooollg Iogtitolo of Toohoology Poggo, Csbodgo, Moo,
OoAk, R (1964) l’ho 00€ of Eoghoh, Lo9gwoo. Loodoo.
Oo,ok, R , Gwgoboow, S , Logob, G , ood S’ooollik, 2. (1972) G,owwoo of ooooowpoo’ooy E,,gloh.

Robio.C (1966(’ThoIiog100looo9flooooolollooo’ oo AopooB of looooIoOog,1 (pool A. H. Swoh(, Sgokgo &

Roooo, J (Oooololod by Tooy Ho,ooooo( (1977) Phddwfoop,obl,glod(.

Rohgods, 1. A. (1965) Thophdooophy of ,hooo,g, Oofood Uooooooify Pooos, Noo Yook

Rho, LV. (1953) ‘TooogIooo’ ho Coooll’, Ewydgpod,o of Liowoowo, ool 1, CR0011, Loodoo
Rooooll, R. (1979) ‘Tho olololog of Q,,oboo’ (liog,oio1io 101001000010), Mob 24, Mooooool
Rylo, 0. (1963) Tho oowopo of iod, Pooogooo Books, Hgo,ooodgooolb.

Swooy, T H. (1968) rho 00 of Po,oloooo, Copo, Loodoo,

S,hloooooohoo, F. (1813) Moohodos dos Ubo’oooooo Sboog (1963)
Sohopoohoooo, A. (1851) ow Stohg (1963)
S,hoooo, W (1P70(Po’oooplo, ood poo6iowo of B,blooloo’ooolooioo, Cowboidgo 000b000ily Poooo, Loodoo.

Soloskooyoh, 61 (1976) ‘Toodoioo’ do I’oopooiowo 000 29000pbo’. Ebodoo do Oogooooqoo opphqodo. 24.

Sholbook, R. (1971) Tho ooofoood oooooolof 0000l,2100,, od. w. AooooogoithoodR. Sfosoook, 000oos,tyof
 BibliBgsaphy 195

Sytkh, A. H. (1958)Atp€601f1”l’91ll0l’9 Sk& & Wtb999g, Ltdt S&ilh, 1. T (1978): it A lyd R A. Pyyby9yy (9db): Py)yglyl, PyIyl lht bl 91) C6y1y11 Lbtt 911.
Sp&tt, M (1979) ‘P689tt ditt lIlt dIll Oldbbbyt Jlytdbqbt Ill
MBINotttbyH&

F 96) ho yboy ly book of y€o 01,0168011, P1911196 Book& HIBBoBdI’

Slytlyy,G (1975) Afo Bybtl op€68 of ltotgbogl old lyoollbotl, Olfoyd UItIllllly OIfold
If

Sotydhll(l,bllIbOd by M I B. ShIl) (l958)LICOI”boltl d6Po,,o, P1191911596k1, HB,lllBdllBth.

‘:0i

Tyyt, 1. ‘(1973) A1f11911 lId Vot’l lg€oo’ Woof61d9h6oo, Molbott, Tht Hlg&1. Ttlf bot, L (1968) G,t ldp,obk,,odlt’dIlkhh’fyl ootltoh€l Ub€9’16911911g, GIylgIfool U11ttl l fy
Tylill, A F (1790) Eooy Ott lhlplhopkt OfObtltlhtlbOIt, DIII, Loydoy, 1912
UlAtIttI, S (1957) PllltOplll yfslyootool, BIllkoIIl, OttfoH.

Votly, 1. P. (1968) ‘Lt tlldlhtbot hotttIll& ttt A Mboool )td (, LIlgbgI, GBIIottltd, P9191.
VIttly, I P lttd I DIlbtlttO (1976) SIyhtoqll ootlpot68 dl ft’lttcbo €1 68 l’ottglto, Dtdttttt, P91191.

WBtd[tlIlkl,M. )1978)otL. GII6I,G KottlIttIIdB. MIltttbllg)Idl ), ThlolylldptototthloflIoottllttott,

W&ghtttttltt, 1 (1967) Rlfl€olbotto ofo 9111101990,, lttp&bIlIhttd 1611916 dttlioyotd If thtt Wltbottg IlItitlltI,

Widtttot, F. )1959)FBg BId FIJIg 9111 Obl,t€ltl,l& KilpI11hIoot & WltIkh, Cologtot ltd BIllity.
WiIII, W. (1978) Ubltollollgottototoohlfh P,obktttl ,otd Mllhydott, 611811 KIHI, Syottglttt.
Wittttttt, W. (1969) ‘ItttpoIIlblIltoI Of t11lttlllftott’ 99 OldotHky, T. M (Id), P9-061109009189 phllolophy of

Wiltg6991t6il,’ )tIlttIIItldbyG F M Attshotttb7))195t)Phllotophtotlotolltlpttlo,ttt,BlBbkolII,OIIIId.

Wltttltltttt, R. R. (1969) Dot fIotttdl Ktotott’otk. Atplko dl, 1t919’919’Ilyhltt UblotlltBttg, VlttdltthlIlk,
Name index

N 52,69, 155 K1k,W. 5, 39,97, 132, 192

Flllh,J. R 9,96 100,113,131

G0f960, 0. 121 O,W V 143-4

197
198 Name index

Sha11xk, R 154 Vnay, I P and Dxnbxlxxt,J. 10,31

Subject index

CIihs 87

CII080 114—16.180

199
200 Sbj&t de

20—72 151 157 130-40 150