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

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Page224

thesourcetext,thenspecificsolutionstotranslationproblemsareanalysedby

meansofthemediatingfunctionalrelationalnotionoftranslationequivalence.

Suchsolutions,however,presupposelinguisticallydefinedsourceandtarget

unitsthatcanberelatedtooneanother.Further,itisnotclearhowoneisto

determinewhenatextisatranslationandwhatcriteriaoneistousefor

evaluatingatranslation.

Intheirfunctionaltheoryoftranslation,ReiβandVermeer(1984)claimthatitis

theskopos,i.e.thepurposeofatranslation,whichisallimportant(see

FUNCTIONALISTAPPROACHES).Thewaythetranslatedtextisadapted

totargetlanguageandcultureNORMSisthentakenastheyardstickfor

evaluatingatranslation.TheauthorsdistinguishbetweenEQUIVALENCEand

adequacy.Equivalencereferstotherelationshipbetweenanoriginalandits

translation,wherebothfulfilthesamecommunicativefunction;adequacyisthe

relationshipbetweensourceandtranslationwherenofunctionalmatchobtains

andthe‘skopos’ofthetranslationhasbeenconsistentlyattendedto.Whether

suchaterminologicaldistinctionisnecessaryandsoundisopentodebate.Of

morerelevancehereisthefailureoftheauthorstospelloutexactlyhowoneis

todeterminewhetheratranslationiseitheradequateorequivalent,letalone

howtoassessitsskopos.Also,giventhecrucialroleassumedbythepurpose

orskoposofatranslationinthismodel,itfollowsthatthesourcetextisof

secondaryimportance;infact,thesourcetextisdegradedtoamere‘sourceof

information’thatthetranslatormaychangeasheorsheseesfit.

Byitsverynature,translationissimultaneouslyboundtothesourcetextandto

thepresuppositionsandconditionsgoverningitsreceptioninthetargetlinguistic

andculturalsystem.Anyattemptatevaluatingtranslationsmusttakethisbasic

factasastartingpoint.Whatisneededthenisamodelwhichattemptsto

transcendanecdotalism,reductionism,programmaticstatementsandintuitively

implausibleonesidedconsiderationsofthesourceortargettextalone.Sucha

modelwouldprovidealinguisticdescriptionandexplanationofwhetherand

howatranslationisequivalenttoitssource.

Afunctionalpragmaticmodelfortranslationqualityassessment

House(1977,1997,2004b,2007)proposesamodelbasedonpragmatic

theoriesoflanguageuse;thismodelprovidesfortheanalysisofthelinguistic

situationalparticularitiesofsourceandtargettexts,acomparisonofthetwo

textsandtheresultantassessmentoftheirrelativematch.Thebasicrequirement

forequivalenceoforiginalandtranslationinthismodelisthatthetranslation

shouldhaveafunction(consistingofanideationalandaninterpersonal

functionalcomponent,intheHallidayansense)whichisequivalenttothatofthe

original.Thetranslationshouldalsoemployequivalentpragmaticmeansfor

achievingthatfunction.

Theoperationofthemodelinvolvesinitiallyananalysisoftheoriginalaccording

toasetofsituationaldimensions,forwhichlinguisticcorrelatesareestablished.

Theresultingtextualprofileoftheoriginalcharacterizesitsfunction,whichis

thentakenasthenormagainstwhichthetranslationismeasured;thedegreeto

whichthetextualprofileandfunctionofthetranslation(asderivedfroman

analogousanalysis)matchtheprofileandfunctionoftheoriginalisthedegreeto

whichthetranslationisadequateinquality.

Inevaluatingtherelativematchbetweenoriginalandtranslation,adistinctionis

madebetweendimensionalmismatchesandnondimensionalmismatches.

Dimensionalmismatchesarepragmaticerrorsthathavetodowithlanguage

usersandlanguageuse;nondimensionalmismatchesaremismatchesinthe

denotativemeaningsoforiginalandtranslationelementsandbreachesofthe

targetlanguagesystematvariouslevels.Thefinalqualitativejudgementofthe

translationthenconsistsofalistingofbothtypesoferrorsandofastatementof

therelativematchofthetwofunctionalcomponents.

ThemodelhasbeendevelopedonthebasisofcontrastiveGerman–English

discourseanalyses(House1996).Empiricalworkwiththemodelhasresulted

inadistinctionbetweentwobasictypesoftranslation,overttranslationand

coverttranslation.Anoverttranslationisrequiredwheneverthesourcetextis

heavilydependentonthesourcecultureandhas

Page225

independentstatuswithinit;acoverttranslationisrequiredwhenneither

conditionholds,i.e.whenthesourcetextisnotsourceculturespecific.

Functionalequivalenceisonlypossibleincoverttranslation,whichismore

difficultthanoverttranslationbecausedifferencesintheculturalpresuppositions

ofthesourceandtargetlanguagecommunitiesmayrequirethetranslatorto

applyaculturalfilter,i.e.asetofcrossculturaldimensionsalongwhich

membersofthetwoculturesdifferinsocioculturalpredispositionsand

communicativepreferences.Thisalsomakesevaluationdifficultbecauseit

involvesassessingthequalityoftheculturalfiltersintroducedintranslation,as

wellasoperationalizingtheconceptof‘context’(House2006).

Recentandpotentialdevelopments

Insightsintowhatgoesoninthetranslator’smindcanbeusedbothto

supplementtranslationevaluationandtovalidatehypothesesaboutthecross

culturaldimensionsthatcharacterizeculturalfilters.Suchintrospectivestudiesof

thetranslationalprocess(forexampleTirkkonenConditandJääskeläinen

2000)arepotentiallyusefulinthattranslatorsindicatehowandwhytheychoose

certainoptionsortranslationalstrategies,thusmakingthedecisionpathinthe

processoftranslationmoretransparent(see

PSYCHOLINGUISTIC/COGNITIVEAPPROACHES;THINKALOUD

PROTOCOLS).Whiletranslationqualityassessmentisobviouslyand

necessarilyproductbased,suchprocessorientedworkisimportantbecauseit

canshedlightontothemysteriouscauseandeffectchainintranslational

behaviour.

Futureapproachestotranslationqualityassessmentneedtobemore

transdisciplinaryinnature(cf.LeeJahnke2001;HouseandBaumgarten2007).

Aninterestingsuggestioninthisdirectionhasalsorecentlybeenmadeby

BolanosCuellar(2007).Heintegratesbothproductandprocessoriented

perspectivesontranslationaswellaslinguistic,literaryandculturallyoriented

viewsinhisdynamictranslationmodel,combiningtextualcontextualaspects

withconsiderationsofthecommunicativenatureoftranslation.

Futureworkontranslationqualityassessmentneedstodevelopbeyond

subjective,onesidedordogmaticjudgementsbypositingintersubjectively

verifiableevaluativecriteriaonthebasisoflargescaleempiricalstudies.Large

CORPORAoftranslationsfromandintomanydifferentlanguages(cf.Bowker

2001;Olohan2004;Kenny2006)mustbeanalysedinordertoformulate

hypothesesaboutwhy,how,andtowhatdegreeonetranslationmaybe

deemedbetterthananother.

Seealso:

EQUIVALENCE;FUNCTIONALISTAPPROACHES;LINGUISTIC

APPROACHES;REVIEWINGANDCRITICISM.

Furtherreading

Koller1979/2004;House1997;Williams2004;House2006a,2006b;House

andBaumgarten2007;Colina2008.

JULIANEHOUSE

Qur’ān(Koran)

TheQur’ānistheholybookofIslamandthemostimportantofthesourcesof

authoritywhichunderpinMuslimreligiouslife,othersbeingaccounts‘relatingto

thedeedsandutterances’oftheProphetMuhammadduringhislife(The

ConciseEncyclopediaofIslam1989:141):thehadith(‘sayings’)andthe

Prophet’sownpractice(sunna,‘tradition’).Thesingularimportanceattached

totheQur’ānstemsfromthebeliefthatitcontains,verbatim,theWordofGod,

asrevealedgraduallytoMuhammadbytheAngelGabrielbetween610and

632AD.Itisthereforeconsideredinimitable,andthishasimportant

implicationsforboththepossibility,legitimacyand(authorized)methodsof

translatingit.

TheQur’ānconsistsof114sura(s),i.e.chapters,eachdividedintoaya(s),i.e.

verses.Eachsurahasaname(forexamplealfatiha ,‘theOpening’,al

baqara,‘theCow’).Withtheexceptionofalfatiha ,ashortsurathatalways

appearsfirstinprintededitions,therestofthesura(s)aremostlyorderedby

lengthratherthanchronologically,withthelongestappearingat