UNIVERSITY OF BENGHAZI

FACULTY OF ARTS

Translation Theories and

Practice
(02801)
Instructor: Nafa Tashani, MA
 UNIVERSITY OF BENGHAZI
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSLATION

Translation Theories and

Practice (02801)
Prepared by: Nafa Tashani, MA

Head of the Department of Translation

Translation Theories & Practice
 Part One

APPROACHES TO TEXT TYPES

TEXT TYPOLOGICAL MODEL

 1.1 Introduction

Much of the theoretical discussion on translation has

revolved around the idea of equivalence with the
original TEXT.
To this end, theoreticians strive to find appropriate
theories and methods of translation to help
translators doing their job.
Many theories, models and approaches have been
proposed and subjected to heated debate amongst
theoreticians.
1.1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction
 Text Typology

It aims at identifying and describing

linguistic and conceptual features that
texts belonging to a particular group
have in common

One of the characteristics of text is its

RESEMBLANCE to or DIFFERENCE
from other texts
Text Typology
Text Typology
Text Typology
 the Arab scholar Al-Jahiz (‫)ا لجاحظ‬had
predicted the emergence of the text
typological model when he states that

“the translator should know the

structure of the text, behaviours of
the people and their ways of
understanding each other”
 Beaugrande and Dressler
define text-typology as

“a set of heuristics for producing,

predicting, and processing textual
occurrences, and hence acts as a prominent
determiner of efficiency, effectiveness, and
appropriateness”
 Reiss (1976: 97-100)

notes that text type is an important concept for translation quality

assessment. she believes that one can be in a position to judge a

translation “fairly”, only when one is able to establish some factors

among which is the determination of “the kind of text the original

represents” in terms of text type and text variety.

 TO SUM UP

Broadly speaking, text-typology aims at

grouping TEXTS into categories and TYPES,

and at identifying and describing linguistic and

conceptual features that texts belonging to a

particular group have in common.

1.2 Text Typological Model
 1.2 Text Typological Model

Hatim and Mason (1990:140), view text type as

"a conceptual framework which enables us to

classify texts in terms of communicative

intentions serving an overall RHETORICAL

purpose".
An overview of a variety
of different approaches
attempting to classify
texts into some major
categories and types
Reiss (1976)
 Beaugrande and Dressler (1981)

They believe that text-types are supposed to perform

specific and intended FUNCTIONS and in so doing

contribute to the process of human and social

communication. They follow this line of thought

because they view text-types as a linguistic product.

 Werlich (1976) dominant contextual focus

He explains this notion by saying that texts

distinctively correlate with the CONTEXTUAL factors

in a communication situation. These factors draw the

addressee’s attention only on specific factors and

circumstances from the whole set of factors.

Werlich’s five dominant contextual foci
Approaches to Text Typology
 A) The formal typology

It draws heavily on the study of register. It associates text-

typology with the prevailing register distinction between
text-types like institutional, technical, literary
Criticism:
The number of types is not definite,
 and there is a vagueness about the meaning of concepts
such as "literary" "technical" or "scientific".
Traits that can be said to belong to one of the types can
be found in another.
Thus content, the basis of formal typology categorization,
cannot act as an adequate discriminator between texts.
 B) The functional typological model

Proponents of (e.g. Newmark 1981, 1988) divide texts

according to Buhler's (1965) three main functions of

language:

the expressive,

the informative and

the vocative.
The functional typological model
 The functional typological model

Criticism:

One advantage of functional typology is that it makes

it possible to list each text-type under a function.

 However, it overlooks how these functions are

rhetorically represented in the text.

 C) The rhetorical Typology

Typologists (e.g. Halliday and Hasan 1976, Hatim

and Mason 1990) prefer to divide texts according to

their rhetorical purposes that characterize every text.

Within this model, three major text-types, with other

branching subtypes, can be listed

The Rhetorical Typology
To sum up
 This concludes our class

Thank you for listening

See you next class!

 Class 2
The Rhetorical Typology

HATIM AND MASON’S

CRITICISM OF OTHER

APPROACHES
 Hatim and Mason’s criticism of the Formal Approach

Hatim and Mason take the stand that texts categorized

according to their field of discourse are not most useful.

Here, the assumption is that classification of texts is

“based on criteria such as field of discourse alone

amounts to little more than a statement of SUBJECT

MATTER”;
 Hatim and Mason’s criticism of the Formal Approach

If defined in this way “text type will be so broad as to

have no predictive value, and when attempts are made

to narrow the focus of description, “we run the risk of

ending up with virtually as many text types as there

are texts” (Hatim, and Mason 1990:138).

 Hatim and Mason’s criticism of the Functional Approach

Classification, based on an over-general notion of text

function leads to categories which are too broad and do

not admit the possibility of a literary text being didactic

and vice versa. One of the problems of text typology is

that, however the typology is set up any real text will

display features of more than one type.

 The Rhetorical Typology

Hatim and Mason proposed method for the classification

of texts maintains that any given text- when meeting a
number of standards of textuality- would have a context, a
structure, and a texture.
Each of these domains is capable of yielding a set of
hypotheses about the text; and when they collaborate, they
can construct a text that is able to reflect its overall
rhetorical goal.
 The Rhetorical Typology

Moreover, it is based on the notion ‘text

predominant rhetorical purpose’ which is "a term

stands for the means whereby a text is defined as a
token of a type. The term subsumes the set of
communicative, pragmatic and semiotic procedures
which followed when relating a text to its context".
(Ibid. 149)
 The Rhetorical Typology

Based on the above-mentioned ‘dominant contextual

focus, three main text types can be distinguished:

exposition, instruction, and argumentation.

 First, Exposition

An expository text is used to

analyze concepts with the aim of

informing or narrating.
 Exposition

In this text category, the contextual focus is

either on the decomposition (analysis) into

constituent elements of given concepts or their

composition (synthesis) from constituent

elements.
 Exposition

In other words, the focus of exposition

is on

states, events, entities and relations.

Expository texts
Description or descriptive text

handles objects or
situations,
i.e. it focus on space
 Narrative text

arrange actions and events in

a particular order: focus on

time.
 Conceptual texts

in terms analysis or synthesis, i.e. to

analyze concepts with the aim of

informing or narrating.
 Exposition

In exposition, the focus is on providing a detached

account. The topic sentence sets the scene and must be

expounded (explain). Thus, the scene setter exposes

various aspects of the scene being introduced to be

expounded. (Please refer to the text 3 in the appendix)

 Second, instruction

Instructive text is used to direct the receiver towards

a certain course of action. The focus here is on the

formation of future behaviour in order to regulate

through instructions the way people act or think

 Instruction

Generally speaking, the focus in this text-

type is directed towards swaying opinions

or behaviour and to provoking action or
reaction.
(please refer to text 4 in the appendix).
 
Instruction
Thank you for listening
See you next class!

ARGUMENTATIVE

TEXTS
 Class 3
The Rhetorical Typology

ARGUMENTATIVE

TEXTS
 Third, Argumentation

An argumentative text is used to evaluate

objects, events or concepts with the aim of

influencing future behaviour.

Argumentative Text-type
 Counter-argumentative text

Counter-argumentative text involves

rebuttal of a cited thesis followed by a

substantiation and conclusion.

 Russia's Space Programme
Thesis to be opposed For the Russian space
programme, the comeback was
supposed to begin last month.

Ever since the fall of

Opposition
communism, the agency that
gave the world Sputnik, Gagarin
and the space station Mir
appeared to have fallen too.
 Russia's Space Programme
Substantiation 1 Russia has been funnelling all its
space resources into the launch of its
Mars 1996 probe.
But last month, the grand
Substantiation 2
promenade to Mars turned into a
near earth lob shot.
Substantiation 3
Russia sustained a less conspicuous
public relations blow when officials
admitted that two of the country's
spy satellites had recently fallen
from orbit.
 Russia's Space Programme
Conclusion
In the wake of the Mars debacle, this

was enough to cause observers inside

Russia and out to wonder aloud just how

deep the space programme's troubles

run and whether any technological

solution can fix what ails it.

 the through-argumentative text

The through-argumentative text is

characterized by an extensive

substantiation of an initial thesis

followed by a conclusion.
 Teaching of human rights in schools

The defense of human rights does not at first sight seem a natural subject for classroom teaching.
Today’s children, although well informed and open minded, do not readily support grand-
sounding causes unless they can see obvious advantage for themselves , or are simply moved by
fashion, as in the case of events aimed at raising money for starving Ethiopians .

The French Education Ministry has now included human rights teaching in the syllabus. A
recommendation made by the council of Europe and in encouraged by the French education
ministry, suggested that pupils can be introduced to human rights in subjects as history ,
geography, religious instructions, Languages , literature and economics. Moreover; children in
nursery or primary school will be able to experience for themselves the non –violent settlement of
arguments and differences as well as respect for others within the framework of the classroom.

This type of education requires much more than the good intentions of those who recommended it.
It is a sensitive subject, and requires a lot of imagination on the part of the teachers, broad-
mindedness in headmasters and the pupils own enthusiasm.
Analysis
Analysis
Analysis
Analysis
 Argumentative Text-type

Counter-argument Through-argument

i. Thesis cited to be opposed i. Thesis cited to be supported

ii. Opposition ii. Substantiation

iii. Substantiation of counter- iii. Conclusion

claim

iv. Conclusion  
 counter-argumentative text

Within counter-argumentation,

there are two sub-types:

balance and explicit concessive.

counter-argumentative text
 Argumentation vs. Exposition

Argumentation

Tone-setter > Thesis substantiated

Exposition :

Scene-setter > Aspects of the scene expounded

 Reiss (1976)

A COMPARISON BETWEEN

ARGUMENTATIVE TEXTS AND

INSTRUCTIONAL TEXTS WITH OPTIONS

 Argumentative texts and instructional texts with options

Reiss She believes that the two types can be treated

as operative-type texts. She lays down the following

principles of operative texts (texts that arouse

interest):
Reiss’ operative texts
Reiss’ operative texts
 Argumentative texts and instructional texts with options

Despite these similarities, clearer patterns of logical

thinking are more apparent in argumentative than in

instructional texts, because, given discoursal as well as

generic constraints, logical presentation tends to be

part and parcel of the argumentative text format.

 To sum up

The three typological notions (formal, functional and

rhetorical) may not exclude each other. They overlap
in some instances, for example, both the functional
category "vocative" and the rhetorical "instructive"
tend to aim at the readership. The notions may also
complement each other, for example, the formal
categories may serve as a format for either the
functional or rhetorical typology. Texts can be
categorized as: (a). expressive, literary or (b)
expository; scientific.
Thank you for listening
See you next class!

ARGUMENTATION IN ENGLISH
AND ARABIC
Argumentation in English and
Arabic
 Argumentation in English and Arabic

Various argumentative formats appear not to be

equally available for all language users to choose from

and the preference for one or the other varies within,
as well as across, languages and cultures. Hatim and
Mason (Ibid.) believe that the preference for one or
the other form is motivated by many factors, such as
politeness, ideology, power and so forth.
 Argumentation in English and Arabic

 Koch (1983: 47) who emphasizes the notion that culture

dominates rhetoric conventions, claims that "in contrast to

Western modes of argument, which are based on a syllogistic

model of proof and made linguistically cohesive through the

subordination and hypotaxis, Arabic argumentation is

essentially paratactic, abductive and analogical".

 Argumentation in English and Arabic

She concludes that persuasion in Arabic can be

achieved by making its argumentative claims

linguistically present: by repeating and paraphrasing

them.
 Argumentation in English and Arabic

In comparison with Arabic which coheres through

the high frequency of cohesive devices, English opts
for economy in the use of such devices (Renad
Abbadi 2014). In other words, each language has a
unique set of rhetorical conventions. Thus, the
tendency to prefer an argumentative style or format
over another does not necessarily mean that the
language lacks that style. The more logical
interpretation is that for certain reasons, language
users tend to favour a certain style.
 Argumentation in English and Arabic

Hatim (1991) identifies two variants of argumentation in

respect of Arabic and English.

The first variant is through argumentation which is

more typical of Arabic than English.

The second is counter-argumentation which is more

frequently a characteristic of English and can be divided

into two further sub-types: balance and lopsided.
 the format or structure of counter and
through- argumentation

English Arabic

A. the balance counter-argument through-argumentation

B. through-argumentation the lopsided argument

C. the lopsided (misleading) argument the balance argument

 Argumentation in English and Arabic

Texts can also have different levels of argumentation

which Hatim (1990) identified as macro- and micro-

balance. Macro-balance indicates the argumentative

format of the entire text whereas micro-balance

indicates an embedded argument within the macro-

pattern of text.
 Mistranslation of Text-type Format

The Arabic and English argumentative STs were

analyzed by applying Hatim and Mason's (1990)

approach to textual analysis of argument structure

(see Table One). The results of this structural analysis

are displayed in the following representative tables:

Text One: (through argument)
‫العالقات المصرية االمريكية‬
‫العالقات المصرية االمريكية‬
Text Two: (counter argument)
Russia's Space Programme
Russia's Space Programme
Russia's Space Programme
As to the translation of Text One
As to the translation of Text One
Translation of Text One
 PART TWO

DISCOURSE
PARAMETERS
(REGISTER)
 Aspects of meaning

The essence of translation that meaning be

preserved across the two languages involved
has three basic aspects: semantic,

pragmatic and

textual.
 The semantic aspect

is the most easily accessible from

the three aspects and has been
given preference by evaluators.
 The pragmatic aspect

that is "the particular use of an

expression on a specific occasion",
(House, 1977:27). It is very important in
translation because translation deals with
language in use.
 The textual aspect

has been frequently neglected though it is a very

important aspect because all the references such as
substitutions, anaphora, ellipses, etc. that make up
the different ways of text functions account for the
textual meaning that should be preserved in
translation.
 Aspects of meaning

The equivalence sought should be an

equivalence of function that is both source
and translated texts must present the same
function and the text's function can only be
made explicit through a detailed analysis of
the text itself.
 Aspects of meaning

white coffee

is an equivalence of function to

 ‫قهوة ابحلليب‬
 2.2 Register (Discourse Parameters)

Style is often determined by the social relationship that holds

between participants in discourse as, for instance, between the

translator and the TL reader in the case of translation. This
interaction between producer, translator and receiver (TL
reader) must also operate, as Hatim (1997:25) points out,
"within constraints imposed by the particular 'use' to which
they [text producer and receiver] put their language".
 Register (Discourse Parameters)

Following Halliday (1976), he identifies these

constraints as the three discourse parameters.

These three Hallidayan parameters constitute the

situational adequacy.
2.2 Register (Discourse Parameters)

 FIELD,

 TENOR

 MODE
 Field of Discourse

is an abstract term which refers to what the text is about.

Linguistic choices in translation are often determined in
terms of the field of discourse. Field of subject matter can
be a novel, poem, play, social action: it can be specific,
general, popular, etc.
 Field of Discourse

In crude terms, field refers to the nature of the social

action: what it is the interactants are about, what is

going on, where what is going on is interpreted

institutionally, in terms of some culturally recognized

activity.
 Field of Discourse

Examples of fields are activities such as tennis, opera,

linguistics and so forth. When people ask you what you do

when first getting to know you, you tend to answer in terms

of field.
 
 Tenor of discourse

concerns the relationship between the author of

the text and the intended reader. Tenor refers to
the statuses and role relationships: who is taking
part in the interaction. It refers to the way you
relate to other people when doing what you do.
 Tenor of discourse

One aspect of tenor is status people have power

over one another. In some particular discourses,

tenor is of most significance as it is concerned with

the power and status of the participants.

 Tenor of discourse

Misrepresentation of tenor, on the other hand,

is often a result of a failure to transfer the ST's

interpersonal relationships. Writer's or

translator's background and stance, social role

relationship.
 Tenor of discourse

In this respect, two relationships can be identified:

(1)symmetrical means the text contains features
indicating solidarity and equality between addresser
and addressees; and,
(2)asymmetrical means the text contains features
indicating authority relationship between addresser
and addressees.
 Tenor of discourse

Social attitude: the text contains features

indicating the degrees of social distance or

proximity, i.e. five styles of formality: frozen,

formal, consultative, casual and intimate.

 Mode of discourse

is the form of the text, however, is concerned with the role

language plays in the interactive process. Mode refers to the

rhetorical channel and function of the discourse: what part the

text is playing. It also refers to the channel you select to

communicate speech and writing, e-mail, telephone, radio,

television, video, film and so on.  

 Mode of discourse

For example, the abbreviation re is appropriate

in a business letter but is rarely, if ever, used in

spoken English
 Mode of discourse

Likewise, ‫ ب;;;سملة‬an (acronym of the Arabic verse

meaning ;‫ ب;;;س;م; هللا;;; ا;;لرحم;نا;;لرحيم‬is widely used in

written Arabic but is unlikely to be acceptable in

spoken Arabic varieties.

 Mode of discourse

These language choice restrictions (re and

‫ )ب;;;سملة‬are in both cases likely to be imposed,
as Baker (ibid.) explains, by the fact that
speakers of each language have certain
expectations about what kind of language is
appropriate to particular situations.
 Mode of discourse

In terms of text mode, counter-argumentative

text has a distinctive mode. Text mode is a

term used in linguistic studies as a parameter

to distinguish one stretch of language from

another.
 Mode of discourse

According to Halliday and Hasan’s classification, (1985:

12), counter-argumentative text, being an evaluative
discourse, is written to be read. They believe that counter-
argumentative text, unlike a political speech, which is a
text written to be read aloud, is written to be read silently
like those in newspapers, books of various sorts, journals,
magazines, and etc.
 Mode of discourse

Mode or medium: is complex if it is written

to be read and simple if it is written to be
heard. Participation is simple if it means
monologue or complex if it means
addressing a large community.
 Mode of discourse

Hatim (1997:26) argues that tenor,

perhaps the most determining factor of
the translator/receiver relationship,
overlaps with both field and mode
resulting in formality and technicality.
On the other facet, tenor overlaps with
mode giving rise to functional tenor as
illustrated in the following figure:
 Mode of discourse

TECHNICALITY/FORMALITY

FIELD
TENOR
MODE

FUNCTIONAL TENOR
 Thank you for listening
See you next class!

2.3 TRANSLATION
ERRORS