CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1. Nature of Translation

Translation theory’s main concern is to determine appropriate methods for

the widest possible of texts or text categories. Further, it provides a framework of

principles, restricted rules and hints for translating text and criticizing translation, a

background of problem solving (Newmark, 1993:19). Thus, an institutional term or a

metaphor or synonym in collocation may be each be translated in many ways, if it is

out of context; in these areas, the theory demonstrates the possible translation

procedures and the various arguments and against the use of one translation rather

than another in a particular context.

Translation theory attempts to gives some insights into the relation between

thought, the meaning language of universal, cultural and individual aspect of

language and behavior, the understanding of cultures, and the interpretation of text

that may be clarified and even supplemented by way of translation (Newmark,

1993:19). Thus translation theory covers a wide range of pursuits, attempts always to

be useful, to assist the individual translator both by stimulating him/her to write

better and to suggest points of agreement on common translation problems.

Assumptions and preposition about translation normally arise only from

practice, and should not be offered without examples of originals and their

translations. As other literature, the examples are often more interesting than the

thesis itself. Further, the translation theory alternates and hyphens the most abstract

themes and the symbolic power of a metaphor or the interpretation of a multivalent

myth.

There are some aspects in a translation text as described by translation

theorists (Kussmaul: 1999:435). They are as the following:

• Firstly, there is comprehension and interpretation of texts which implies the

management of the approach principles to various types of texts, considering

the textual, referential, cohesion and naturalness levels. This competence

includes reading comprehension and message interpretation (encoding and

decoding).

• Secondly, re-wording is also important. It means the application of the

various strategies for the restitution process of the message (re-coding) by

choosing the appropriate method(s), techniques and procedures. Among the

most frequently used procedures for the restoration of ideas contained in a

translation unit, a translator may resort to transfer, cultural or functional

equivalent, synonymy, transposition, modulation, compensation, reduction

and expansion or amplification. These skills constitute the essence of

translating competence and should most strongly emphasize in the training

prospective translators. For this purpose, it is also indispensable to make

effective use of different types of documentation: Parallel texts, monolingual

and bilingual dictionaries, encyclopedias, term data base, informants, and

other sources.

• Thirdly, translation theorists give great importance to the assessment of the

result, i.e. evidencing the capacity to confront the translated text with the

original text, being able to assess earnings and losses and showing self-
 8

correction capacity. It is the accurate revision of the output that will definitely

result in a final translation of higher quality.

Based on the statements above, it can be concluded that there are some

aspects in a translation text; comprehension and interpretation of texts which implies

the management of the approach principles to various types of texts. Choosing the

appropriate method, techniques and procedures is important in translation. There is a

great important thing in translation that is the assessment of the result.

2.2 Definition of Translation

Translation theory derives from comparative linguistics, and within

linguistics, it is mainly an aspect of semantics, all questions of semantics relate to

translation theory. Socio-linguistics, which investigates the social registers of

language and the problems of languages in contact in the same or neighboring

countries, has a continuous bearing of translation theory. A translator requires

knowledge of literary and non-literary textual criticism, since he has to access the

quality of a text before he decides how to interpret and translate it. All kinds of false

distinctions have been made between literary and technical translation. (Newmark,

1993:5).

Translation is defined as a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written

massage and/or statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in

another language (Nida, 1995:7). In addition, Martin (1998:1) described translation

as the transference of the content of a text from one language into another, bearing in

mind that we cannot always dissociate the content from the form”. Furthermore,

Martin (1998:8) said that translation is to change into another language, retaining in
the sense. Each exercise involves some kind of loss of meaning, due to a claim of

each language. The basic loss is in a range between over-translation and under-

translation. Next, the intention of the translator, Is she/he trying to ensure that the

translation has the same emotional and persuasive charge of the original, and affects

the reader in the same way as the original?

The first traces of translation date from 300 BC, during the Egyptian Old

Kingdom, in the area of the first Cataract, Elephantine, where inscription in two

languages have been found. It became a significant factor in the west in 300 BC,

when the Romans took over wholesale many elements of Greek culture, including

the whole religious apparatus. In the twelfth century the West came into contact with

Islam in Moorish Spain. The situation favored he two essential conditions for large

scale translation (Nida, 1995:3).

The twentieth century has been called the “age of translation” or

“reproduction”. Whereas in the nineteenth century, translation was mainly one way

means of communications between prominent men of letter and, to a lesser degree,

philosophers and scientists and their educated reader a broad, whilst trade was

conducted in the language of dominant nation, and diplomacy, previously in Latin,

was in French, international agreement between state, public and private organization

are now translated for all interested parties, whether or not the signatories understand

each other’s languages. The setting of a new international body, the constitution of

an independent state the formation of a multinational body, gives translation

enhanced political importance.

In line with the quotation above, it is known that translation is the attempt to
 10

replace a written massage and/or statement in one language by the same message

and/or statement in another language. Another definition is changing one language

text to other language without changing its meaning and contents.

2.3 Translation as Skill, Art or Science

The dichotomy implied in the question of whether translation is an art or a

science is misleading. No one deny that translation of a literary work requires a good

deal of art. The question should rather be whether it is only a skill acquired by

practice or whether it requires also the knowledge of certain technique and

procedures which can be described scientifically.

Fedorov (1994:71), a Russian linguist, was the first to emphasize the

linguistic aspect of translation. He insisted that translation was primarily and always

a linguistic operation; that linguistic was the basic of all translation process. Soon

after, Vinay and Dalbened (1996:52) published a description or method of translating

from English to French. Although the method is referred to as a stylistic compare it is

based on de Saussure’s linguistic theory, and the author states that to classify

translation simply as an art would be to refuse it. One of its intrinsic qualities, its

normal inclusion is the framework of linguistics.

We have here a double claim: (1) that in translating priority should be given

to problems of structure over matters of style; and (2) that translation should be

considered as distinct of scientific investigation, a distinct branch of applied

linguistics. The first claims is supported by a linguist who is actively engaged in

machine translation, states that style are the basic methodological aspect of machine

translation (Jumplet, 1993:273). Besides, he goes on to say: “But, if we admit that

translation is partly linguistics and partly something else, it seems to me that we

should first of all try to define it linguistically.

Having developed a descriptive system for the linguistic part, for which we

do have materials and methods available. The only novelty in this position is that

structural difficulties are not dismissed, as they were before, on the assumption that

although knowledge will take care of them. It is precisely this “knowledge” which is

too often taken for granted and which requires a scientific basis.

As for the word “scientific” it may suggest more than what it is actually

claimed by linguistics. Nida (1995:3) explained when we speak of the science of

translation, we are of course concerned with the descriptive aspect; for just as

linguistics may be classified as a descriptive science, so the transference of a

message from one language to another is likewise a valid subject for scientific

description.

However it must be noted that the classification of linguistics as a descriptive

science does not reduce it to a mere method of describing language, although some

of the formal analyses done in the forties, if taken out of context, might suggest that

interpretation. The description of a set of phenomena, rigorous though it may be,

does not constitute a science. Underlying the description there must be a set of

universal principle, a theory.

In linguistics, according to Osgood (1996:301), there are two kinds of

universal: (1) Empirical generalizations, that hold for all languages (phenotypes), and

(2) Theoretical generalizations, principles in the theory of language behavior, that

hold for all languages (genotypes). These last underlie the rigorous description of the
 12

translation process; without them all translation would be impossible.

There is no need, then, to make a choice: translation is both an art and

science, but the analysis of structure must necessarily precede preoccupations with

style. The contribution of linguistics to that preliminary analysis will be to bring

order and method to the investigation; to determine the limits between linguistic and

non-linguistics problems, and their relation to each other in the total context of

communication (form and content); and finally, to propose a precise terminology

with which to discuss those problems. It does not have all the answers but it has

developed a systematic approach which should lead to more objective grasp of the

translating activity.

2.4 Kinds of Translation

The theory of translation is concerned with a certain type of relation between

languages end is consequently a branch of comparatives linguistics. From the point

of view of translation theory the distinction between synchronic and diachronic

comparison is irrelevant. Translation equivalences may be set up, translations

performed, between any pair of languages or dialects, related or unrelated and with

any kind of spatial, temporal, social or other relationship between them.

Catford, (1994:21-24) stated in term of extent, levels and ranks of translation,

it can be categorized.

1) Full translation versus partial translation

This distinction relates to the extent of source language text which is

submitted to the translation process. By text we mean any stretch of language,

spoken or written, which is under discussion. According to circumstances a text may

thus be a whole library of books, a single volume, a chapter, a paragraph, a sentence,

a clause, etc. It may also be a fragment not co-extensive with any formal literary or

linguistic unit. In a full translation, the entire text submitted to the translation

process: That is, every part or parts of source text is replaced by target language text

material. In a partial translation, some part or parts of the source language text are

left untranslated: they are simply transferred to and incorporated in the target

language text.

In literary translation it is not uncommon for some source language lexical

items to be treated in this way, either because they are regarded as ‘untranslatable’ or

for the deliberate purpose of introducing ‘local color’ into the target language text.

This process of transferring source language lexical items into a target language text

is more complex than appears at first sight, and it is only appropriately true to say

that they remain ‘untranslated’. The distinction between full and partial translation is

hardly a technical one. It is dealt with here, however, since it is important to use the

distinct term partial in this semi technical, systematic, sense, reserving the term

restricted for use in the linguistically technical sense.

2) Total versus Restricted Translation

This distinction relates to the levels of language involved in translation. By

total translation we mean what is most usually meant by translation; that is

translation which all levels of source language (SL) text are replaced by target

language (TL) material. Strictly speaking, total translation is a misleading term, since

though total replacements are involved it is not replacement by equivalent target

language grammar and lexis.

 14

This replacement entails the replacement of source language

phonology/graphology by target language equivalent, hence there is no translation, in

our sense, at that level. For use as a technical term total translation may best be

defined as replacement of source language grammar and lexis by equivalent target

language grammar and lexis with consequential replacement of source language

phonology or graphology by target language phonology/graphology.

By restricted translation, we mean ‘replacement of source language textual

material by equivalent target language textual material, at only one level’. That is

translation performed only at the phonological or at the graphological level, or at

only one of the two levels of grammar or lexis. It should be noted that, though

phonological or graphonological translation is possible, there can be no analogous

‘contextual translation’; that is translation restricted to the inter level of context but

not entailing translation at the grammatical or lexical levels.

In other words, there is no way in which we can replace source language

contextual units by equivalent target language units by equivalent target language

grammatical units, since it is only by virtue of their encapsulation, so to say in formal

linguistic units which are co-extensive with operationally inseparable from the

formal units of grammar and lexis. With the medium levels the situation is different.

Phonology, for instance, is the organization of phonic substance into units

which, in combination, functions as exponents of the units of grammar lexis;

phonological units, as such, are not bound to grammatical or lexical units in the way

in which contextual units are bound to such units. Therefore, separatebility of

phonology or graphology for translation purposes; and on the other hand, the non-
separatebility of context.

In phonological translation, source language phonology is replaced by

equivalent target language phonology, but there are not other replacements except

such grammatical or lexical changes as may result accidentally from phonological

translation. For example, an English plural, such as cats, may come out as apparently

a singular cat in phonological translation into a language which has no final

consonant cluster.

In graphological translation, source language graphology is replaced by

equivalent target language graphology, with no other replacements, except, again,

accidental changes. Phonological translation is practiced deliberately by actors and

mimics who assumes foreign or regional accent, though seldom in a self conscious or

fully consistent way.

Both phonological and graphological translation must be included in a

general theory of translation because they help to throw light on the conditions of

translation equivalence, and hence on the more complex process of total translation.

Graphological translation must not be confused with translation. The latter is a

complex process involving phonological translation with the addition of phonology-

graphology correlation at both ends of the process.

Restricted translation at the grammatical and lexical levels means,

respectively, replacement of source language grammar by equivalent target language

grammar, but with no replacement of lexis, and replacement of source language lexis

by equivalent target language lexis but with no replacement of grammar. Pure

translation restricted to either of these levels is difficult if not impossible owing to

 16

the close interrelations between grammar and lexis and the tendency for exponents of

grammatical categories to be ‘fused’ with exponents of lexical items.

2.5 Technique Used in Translation.

As we all know, good translation is not usually just a question of translating

each word in turn of the source text into the target language. Nor does it (often)

consist, however, of the translator skimming through the source text, putting it aside

and then jotting down the general idea of it in his or her own words in the target

language. In between the two extremes there is a wide variety of techniques

("strategies"), many of which translators will use intuitively for any given text.

One widely-accepted list of translation techniques is outlined briefly below.

Fawcett (1997:34-41) said that there is a more complete description of the technique

used in translation. Their explanations are as follows:

1. Borrowing

This means taking words straight into another language. Borrowed terms

often pass into general usage, for example in the fields of technology ("software")

and culture ("punk"). Borrowing can be for different reasons, with the examples

below being taken from usage rather than translated texts:

• The target language has no (generally used) equivalent. For example, the first

man-made satellites were Soviet, so for a time they were known in English as

"sputniks".

• The source language word sounds "better" (more specific, fashionable, exotic

or just accepted), even though it can be translated. For example, Spanish IT is

 full or terms like "soft [ware]", and Spanish accountants talk of "overheads",

even though these terms can be translated into Spanish.

• To retain some "feel" of the source language. For example, from a recent

issue of the Guardian newspaper: "Madrileños are surprisingly unworldly."

From the quotation above, it’s known that this kind of technique is taking the

words in the source language and put them in the target language without changing

the original words. This technique is not used to translate the texts, but it is used to

take the words in one language and put in another language.

2. Calques

This is a literal translation at phrase level. Sometimes calques work,

sometimes they don't. You often see them in specialized, internationalized fields such

as quality assurance (aseguramiento de calidad, assurance qualité,

Qualitätssicherung).

3. Literal Translation

Just what it says - "El equipo está trabajando para acabar el informe" - "The

team is working to finish the report". Again, sometimes it works and sometimes it

doesn't. For example, the Spanish sentence above could not be translated into French

or German in the same way - you wouldn’t have to use technique.

4. Transposition

This is the mechanical process whereby parts of speech "play musical chairs"
 18

(Fawcett's analogy) when they are translated. Grammatical structures are not often

identical in different languages. "She likes swimming" translates as "Le gusta nadar"

(not "nadando") - or in German, "Sie schwimmt gern", because gerunds and

infinitives work in different ways in English and Spanish, and German is German

(bringing in an adverb to complicate matters). Transposition is often used between

English and Spanish because of the preferred position of the verb in the sentence:

English wants the verb up near the front; Spanish can have it closer to the end.

5. Modulation

Now we're getting clever. Slightly more abstract than transposition, this

consists of using a phrase that is different in the source and target languages to

convey the same idea - "Te lo dejo" - "You can have it".

6. Reformulation (sometimes known as équivalence)

Here you have to express something in a completely different way, for

example when translating idioms or, even harder, advertising slogans. The process is

creative, but not always easy. Would you have given the name Sonrisas y lágrimas to

the film The Sound of Music in Spanish?

7. Adaptation

Here something specific to the source language culture is expressed in a

totally different way that is familiar or appropriate to the target language culture.

Sometimes it is valid, and sometimes it is problematic, to say the least. Should a

restaurant menu in a Spanish tourist resort translate "pincho" as "kebab" in English?

Should a French text talking about Belgian jokes be translated into English as talking
about Irish jokes (always assuming it should be translated at all)? We will return to

these problems of preferentiality below.

8. Compensation

Another model describes a technique known as compensation. This is a rather

amorphous term, but in general terms it can be used where something cannot be

translated from source to target language, and the meaning that is lost in the

immediate translation is expressed somewhere else in the TT (Fawcett, 1997:31). He

defined it as: "...making good in one part of the text something that could not be

translated in another". One example given by Fawcett is the problem of translating

nuances of formality from languages which use forms such as tu and usted (tu/vous,

du/Sie, etc.) into English which only has 'you', and expresses degrees of formality in

different ways.

9. Demonstration

The basic method of instruction for teaching skill-type subject matter is the

demonstration performance method of instruction. This method is recommended for

teaching a skill because it covers all the necessary steps in an effective learning

order. The demonstration step gives trainees the opportunity to see and hear the

details related to the skill being taught (Byrn, 1992:188). So, this technique leads

students to translate the text in English as good as possible. In brief, this technique is

suitable to be implemented in teaching the translation to the students in the class.