Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd edition)

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Page86

importantexceptionsinscience,religionandliterature.Scientifictreatises

continuedtobetranslatedintoLatinuntiltheendoftheeighteenthcentury.

Inliterature,theideapersistedinsomequartersthatwritinginthevernaculars

waslikewritinginsand,whereaswritinginLatinorGreekwaslikeworkingin

marble.BecausevernacularlanguagessuchasEnglishwereconstantlychanging

andhadalimitednumberofreaders,someworksweretranslatedintoLatinto

reachawideraudience.Forexample,Milton’sParadiseLostwastranslated

intoLatinbyThomasPower(1691)inordertorevealMiltontotheworldasa

greatpoet.

Contextanddirectionalitypractice

Directionalityisinfluencedbythecontextinwhichtranslationtakesplace:

languagecombinations,theavailabilityoftranslatorswiththoselanguage

combinationsandofsubjectspecialists,genres,deadlines,differentkindsof

institutionalcontrolsandindividualtranslators’expertcompetence.Ifthesource

languageandthetargetlanguageareinclosecontact(geographical,commercial

andculturalproximity)therewillbemoreB



Atranslatorsavailable.Thisisthe

casewithFrenchandEnglish.FrenchistaughtinEnglishschoolsasEnglishisin

Frenchschools,andthereareFrenchnativespeakertranslatorsintheUnited

Kingdomandviceversa.Whensuchproximitybetweensourceandtarget

languagesdoesnotexistoronlyexistsinonedirection(Englishistaughtin

FinnishschoolsbutFinnishisnottaughtinEngland),itwillbehardertofind



Atranslators.However,theimportanceofgeographicaldistancehasbeen

minimizedbytheInternet.

Amongthemostimportantfactorsthatseemtohaveaffecteddirectionality

practicesinthetwentiethandtwentyfirstcenturiesare:globalizationandthe

increasingvolumeoftranslations;theInternet;theuseofEnglishasan

internationallanguageandasalanguageofadministrationwithincertain

multilingualcountries(suchasIndiaorSouthAfrica),highereducationand

business;thestruggleforsurvivaloflesserusedandlessertranslatedlanguages;

immigrationandthegrowthofcommunitytranslationandinterpreting(the2006

AmericanTranslationandInterpretingStudiesAssociationconferencefocused

onhowSpanishheritagestudentsintheSouthWestposedathreattothe

classicaldefinitionofdirectionality).

Marketconditionsinfluencedirectionality.JohnWheen(2006:4),theChairman

oftheATC(AssociationofTranslationCompanies),reportedamongthe

SWOTs(Strengths,Weaknesses,OpportunitiesandThreats)identifiedintheir

2005generalconferencecertainmarketconditionscloselyrelatedto

directionality:‘Weaknesses:FewBritishnationalswithFar/MiddleEast

Languages;InternetmarketingversuscheapglobalTSPs[TranslationServices

Providers].Opportunities:UniversalEnglish;Webtrade;Emergingcountries

import/export.Threats:LowcostoverseasTSPsimprovingquality;Indianand

EasternEuropeancheapEnglish.’

Politicalconditionsalsoinfluencedirectionality.Insomecountriesdirectionality

isdeterminedbynormsdesignedtoassurethepoliticalallegianceofthe

translator.InSyriaandNorthKorea,theofficialtranslatorsforSpanish

languagebroadcastshavetobecivilservantsand,therefore,A



Btranslators.

ThebroadcastersareLatinAmerican,buttheyarenotallowedtorevisethe

scriptsbeforegoingontheair.Martin(2003:428)suggeststhatattitudesto

directionalityininterpreting(theWesternEuropeanB



Amodelversusthe

EasternEuropeanA



Bmodel)alsohaveanideologicalbasis.

Currentapproachestounderstandingdirectionality

Despitethecomplexityoftranslationcompetenceanddirectionalitypracticesin

differentcountries,theassumptionthatnativespeakerequalsqualitystillprevails

andarecentguideforclients,Translations–GettingitRight(Durban2003),

writtenfortheITI(InstituteofTranslationandInterpreting,UK)andendorsed

byATA(AmericanTranslatorsAssociation,USA)andFIT(International

FederationofTranslators)advisesclientsthat‘professionaltranslatorswork

intotheirnativelanguage.Asatranslationbuyeryoumaynotbeawareofthis

butatranslatorwhofloutsthisbasic

Page87

ruleislikelytobeignorantofotherimportantqualityissuesaswell.’Thisissue

hasbeenthetopicofseveralheatedInternetdebatesamongtranslators.Those

supportingdirecttranslationtendedtobeEnglishnativespeakers.Inone

debate,ChrisDurban(2004),theauthoroftheoriginalguide,admittedthat:

Thereishardlyasinglestatementabouttranslationortheindustrythatappliesin

allsituations(e.g.dearthofJapanesetoEnglishtranslatorsreportedhere;same

seemstoapplyforFinnishtoEnglish…).Thisproblemiscompoundedby

translatorsmakingcategoricallyopposingstatements/claims(eachoneusually

beingvalidorpartiallyso…ifonlythey’dtelluspreciselywhichsectionofthe

marketandwhichmarketconditionstheyarereferringto…).

Whereasattitudesamongsttranslationassociationsandcompaniesstillseemto

bemainlyprescriptive,thereisincreasingrecognitionofthecomplexityofthe

issueamongsttranslationscholars.Thedifferentapproachesreflecttheworking

contextsoftheauthors,manyofwhomaretranslatortrainers.Inthe1990s,

someofthestudiesondirectionalitystressedthe‘service’sideofA



B

translations.InFinland,McAlister(1992:297)arguedthatthemajorityofA



B

translationsfromFinnishtoEnglishweretextsforinternationalconsumption,

wheretheargumentthatthetranslatorhastohavenativespeakercompetencein

thetargetlanguageandculturelosessignificance.Finnishtouristbrochuresin

EnglishareintendednotonlyforEnglishnativespeakersbutalsoforItalian,

DutchandJapanesevisitors.Translatorsworkingoutoftheirnativelanguage

cantranslatethiskindoftextcompetently,i.e.‘transmittheintendedmessagein

alanguagewhichisclearandsufficientlycorrectnottostrainthereader’s

patienceunduly’(ibid.).InSpain,Beeby(1996)wasconcernedwithtraining

translatorstobeawareoftheirlimitationsandstrengthsinA



Btranslationand

torecognizewhichgenrestheycantranslatecompetentlyandhowtogoabout

preparingthemselvesforthetask.TheassumptionwasthatA



Btranslation

shouldberestrictedtostandardized,informativegenresandinterpretingin

situationswherelessthanperfectpronunciationandsyntaxareacceptableif

theydonotinterferewiththecommunicativesituation.InAustralia,Campbell

(1998)evaluatedthecompetenciesofimmigrantstranslatingfromtheirmother

tonguesintoEnglishasasecondlanguage.Thestudy,whichfocusedonthe

developmentofdifferentaspectsoftranslationcompetenceamongstL2

translators,ratherthanthetranslationproductasaninferiorversionof

translationintothemothertongue,showedthatthosecompetencieswerenot

merelylinguistic.

SnellandCrampton(1989:85)stressedtheimportanceofunderstandingthe

sourcetext:‘Inspecializedfieldsitmightalsobefoundthatitwasmoresuitable

touseasubjectspecialistwithknowledgeofthesourcelanguagethanamother

tonguetranslator,especiallyifthetextissubsequentlytobeedited.’

Inthefirstdecadeofthetwentyfirstcentury,scholarsarelessapologeticabout

describingotherformsofdirectionalityandtwointernationalconferenceshave

contributedtothismoreconfidentapproach(Ljubliana1997andGranada

2002).Empiricalstudieshavesuppliedmoreinformationabouttherelationship

betweencontextanddirectionalityandtheinadequacyoftheterms‘mother

tongue’or‘bilingual’todefinethelinguisticandculturalelementsoftranslation

competence.Pokorn’swork(2003,2005)onthereceptionofSlovene

literaturetranslatedintoEnglishchallengesthetraditionalaxiomsofthe

superiorityofdirecttranslation.Prunč(2003)providesatheoreticalframework

basedonethnolinguisticdemocracyforrightingtheideologicalasymmetriesof

directionalityandarguesthatthereisnosuchthingasanapriorioptimal

translationbecausequalitycriteriavaryindifferentcontexts.Accordingto

Lorenzo(2003),dogmaticapproachestodirectionalityderivefromlinguistic

conceptsoftranslationcompetence.HerstudiesofDanish(A)



Spanish(B)

translationssuggestthatdirectionalityisjustonemorefactorthatobliges

translatorstoactivatetheirstrategiccompetenceinordertominimizetherisks

involvedindecisionmaking.ExpertB



AtranslatorsarecompetentA



B

translators,regardlessofthegenre.Sheclaimsthattheoreticalframeworksare

beingleftbehindbythetechnologythathasrevolutionizeddocumentation

strategiesfortranslators.ThesectionsonteachingA



B