1
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING
UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
PHAN THỊ THU THỦY
AN INVESTIGATION
INTO ENGLISH - VIETNAMESE
TRANSLATION OF EUPHEMISM
Subject Area : The English Language
Code
:
60.22.15
M.A. THESIS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
Supervisor: TRẦN ĐÌNH NGUYÊN, M.A.
DANANG - 2011
i
DECLARATION
Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis
contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from
a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or
diploma.
No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in
the thesis.
This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or
diploma in any other tertiary institution.
Danang - 2011
Phan Thị Thu Thủy
ii
ABSTRACT
This thesis has been done in an effort to investigate how euphemism is
translated from English into Vietnamese in translated works as well as to
find out what are the main approaches taken by translators in translating
euphemism from English into Vietnamese. A collection of samples taken
from literary works written in English and their Vietnamese versions have
been analyzed to explore ways in which euphemisms are transferred.
Besides, quantitative analyses have also been carried out to show
distribution of ways of translating, on the basis of which to identify
preferences. The findings, it is hoped, will help to put forward some
suggestions for the translation as a profession and for the teaching and
learning of English to overcome the misunderstandings and barriers during
the cross-cultural communication.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DECLARATION .............................................................................................. i
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................iii
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1
1.1. Rationale .................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Signification of the Study........................................................................... 2
1.3. Scope of the Study ..................................................................................... 2
1.4. Research Questions .................................................................................... 2
1.5. Definition of Terms .................................................................................... 2
1.6. Organisation of the Study........................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL
BACKGROUND ............................................................... 4
2.1. A Review of Previous Studies.................................................................... 4
2.2. Theoretical Background ............................................................................. 5
2.2.1. Theory of Translation.......................................................................... 5
2.2.1.1. Definitions of Translation............................................................ 5
2.2.1.2. Language and Culture.................................................................. 7
2.2.1.3. Translation Equivalence .............................................................. 9
2.2.1.4. Translation Methods ................................................................. 11
2.2.1.5. Communicative Translation and Semantic Translation ............ 14
2.2.2. Euphemisms ...................................................................................... 16
2.2.2.1. Concepts and Definitions of Euphemisms................................. 16
2.2.2.2. Characteristic Features of Euphemisms..................................... 19
2.2.2.3. Euphemisms and Other Linguistic Units ................................... 21
iv
2.2.3. Semantic Characteristics of English Words...................................... 25
2.2.3.1. Word Meaning ........................................................................... 25
2.2.3.2. Sense Relations .......................................................................... 27
2.2.3.3. Componential Analysis in Translation....................................... 28
2.2.4. Classification of Euphemisms and Theorists’ Ways for
Translation of Euphemisms ............................................................ 29
2.2.4.1. Classification of Euphemisms........................................................ 29
2.2.4.2. Theorists’ Ways for Translations of Euphemisms......................... 31
CHAPTER 3 - METHOD AND PROCEDURE......................................... 34
3.1. Aims and Objectives................................................................................. 34
3.1.1. Aims .................................................................................................. 34
3.1.2. Objectives.......................................................................................... 34
3.2. Research Design ....................................................................................... 34
3.3. Method of Research.................................................................................. 35
3.4. Data Collection and Description .............................................................. 35
3.5. Research Procedures................................................................................. 36
CHAPTER 4 - DISCUSSIONS OF FINDINGS ......................................... 37
4.1. The Ways of English-Vietnamese Translation of Euphemisms as
Manifested in Translated Works ............................................................. 37
4.1.1. Translation of Euphemisms expressing Death.................................. 37
4.1.2. Translation of Euphemisms expressing Sex .................................... 49
4.1.3. Translation of Euphemisms expressing Pregnancy .......................... 63
4.1.4. Translation of Euphemisms expressing Childbirth........................... 71
4.2. Three main Approaches to Translation of Euphemism............................ 79
4.2.1. Translation of Euphemism into an Equivalent Euphemism by
Finding the Exact Counterpart in the TL text ................................. 79
v
4.2.2. Translation of Euphemism into a Non-equivalent Euphemism by
Translating the Euphemistic Meaning of the SL text or by
Adding Footnotes and Explanatory Words in the TL text .............. 81
4.2.3. Translation of Euphemism into a direct form in the TL text ............ 82
CHAPTER 5 – CONCLUSIONS ................................................................. 83
5.1. Summary of the Findings ........................................................................ 83
5.2. Implications for Translation .................................................................... 85
5.3. Implications for Language Teaching and Learning ................................ 85
5.4. Some Limitations of the Study................................................................ 86
5.5. Some Suggestions for Further Research ................................................. 87
REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 88
QUYẾT ĐỊNH GIAO ĐỀ TÀI
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Title
Page
Figure 4.1. Proportion of Distribution of Euphemism expressing
Death in the SL Text Transferred into the TL Text
49
Figure 4.2. Proportion of Distribution of Euphemism expressing
Sex in the SL Text Transferred into the TL Text
62
Figure 4.3. Proportion of Distribution of Euphemism expressing
Pregnancy in the SL Text Transferred into the TL Text
70
Figure 4.4. Proportion of Distribution of Euphemism expressing
Childbirth in the SL Text Transferred into the TL Text
78
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. RATIONALE
It is well known that human culture, social behavior and thinking
cannot exist without languages. Being a social and national identity and a
means of human communication, languages cannot help bearing imprints of
ethnic and cultural values as well as the norms of behavior of a given
language community. Obviously, ideas, notions and feelings are actually
universal but the way we describe them in different languages is very unique.
Therefore, translation plays a crucial role in enhancing better understanding
each other, transmitting information, exchanging experiences and getting
knowledge. However, translating from one language into another is no easy
task. Translation must take into account a number of constraints, including the
context, the rules of grammar of the two languages, their writing conventions,
and their idioms. The most important idea is that translators have to be honest
in relaying the meaning, especially from one culture to another. It can be said
that one of the greatest difficulties that challenges translators are translating
figures of speech in general and euphemism in particular. Euphemism, a very
important
culture-loaded
figure
of
speech,
is
often
employed
in
communication and reflects the historical, political, economic and ideological
situations of a nation with its own characteristics. The translation of
euphemism has become more and more important with the development of
the inter-cultural communication.
This thesis attempts to study the figures of speech on the aspect of
translation to give some considerations and propose methods in translating
these figures of speech in general and euphemism in particular.
2
1.2. SIGNIFICATION OF THE STUDY
We hope this study will offer some help to the translators when doing
the translation of euphemism and assist them to overcome the
misunderstandings and barriers during the cross-cultural communication.
1.3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study investigates the ways used in translating euphemism from
English into Vietnamese. The investigation will focus on works of English
literature and their Vietnamese versions.
1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The research has attempted to answer the following questions:
1. How euphemism is translated from English into Vietnamese as seen
in examples taken from works of literature?
2. What are the main approaches taken by translators in translating
euphemism from English into Vietnamese?
1.5. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
- “Source language” is the language in which a text was originally
written.
- “Target language” is the language in which a text is translated.
- “Euphemism” is a figure of speech. It is used as an alternative to an
expression, in order to avoid possible loss of face: either one’s own face or
through giving offense, that of the audience, or of some third party.
- “Semantic approach” is an approach to translation which has these
features:
SL bias
Keeping semantic and syntactic structures as closely as possible
Author- centered
- “Communicative approach” is an approach which has these features:
TL bias
3
Keeping effect as closely as possible
Second reader-centered.
1.6. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
This research paper consists of five chapters:
Chapter one: Introduction
In this chapter we would present the statements of the problem, the
justification for the study, the scope of the study, the organization, as well as
definitions of terms.
Chapter two: Literature Review
The chapter covers a review of literature on translation of euphemism.
Prior studies on the problems are reviewed for the groundwork of the
research. This chapter also introduces some theoretical preliminaries on the
translation theory, the definitions and classification of euphemism and the
area of semantics.
Chapter three: Method and Procedures
This chapter provides the aims and objectives of the study, the research
methods used in order to achieve these aims. Next comes the research
procedures which include the research questions, the hypothesis, data
collection and analysis.
Chapter four: Finding and Discussions
This chapter presents the findings and discussion of ways used in
translating euphemism from English into Vietnamese. The discussion also
covers the main approaches taken by translators in translating euphemism
from English into Vietnamese.
Chapter five: Conclusions
This chapter consists of the conclusion of the whole study, the
implications for the translation and for the teaching and learning. Limitations
in doing the research and suggestions for further studies are also mentioned in
this chapter.
4
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL
BACKGROUND
2.1. A REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES
Translation is a complex process where fragile balance is achieved
between the equivalence of the text translated and the linguistic means
chosen. In reality, translation of euphemism from one language into another
language is a complex work which poses great difficulties to the translator so
there are many researchers dealing with euphemism translation in different
aspects. They can be seen in the following studies:
In “Introduction to Semantics and Translation” (1990), Barnwell [23,
p. 62-64] introduces some features of euphemism and also presents some
notes on translating euphemisms.
In “Euphemism and Dysphemism - Language Used as Shield and
Weapon” (1990), Allan and Burridge [21] mentions about the development,
the classification of English euphemisms and the differences among
euphemism, slang, dysphemism and taboo.
D.J. Enright [30] in “Fair of Speech” (1986), introduces euphemisms
and sex, death, politics, the media, the law and many others as well as
mentioned about the uses of euphemism.
In “Stylistics” (1977), Galperin [31] gives a definition of euphemism
and also divides them into several groups according to their spheres of
application: 1) religious, 2) moral, 3) medical, 4) parliamentary.
In Vietnamese, euphemisms have been discussed by some linguists:
Bằng Giang [1] in “Tiếng Việt phong phú” (1997), investigates over
1,000 variants of the word death with illustrations.
5
In “Phong cách học Tiếng Việt” (2001), Đinh Trọng Lạc [4, p.126]
puts forward the basic theoretical background of euphemisms in the
Vietnamese language. He assumes that euphemism is the delicate expression
in communicative situation in which the addresser feels uncomfortable to talk
about taboo topics because he is afraid that it will hurt or offend the addressee
“Uyển ngữ là phương thức diễn ñạt tế nhị trong hoàn cảnh giao tiếp mà
người nói không tiện nói ra vì sợ quá phũ phàng hoặc sợ xúc phạm ñến người
nghe”.
Trương Viên [19] (2003; Ph.D. Thesis) focuses on the linguistic
features of euphemisms by analyzing their formation by syntactic, phonetic,
lexical and stylistic means. With the contrastive analysis, the author also
pointes out some features related to the method of translation.
Nguyễn Thị Lê [15] (2006; M.A thesis) focuses on the study on
commonly-used euphemisms in English and Vietnamese newspapers in three
aspects: syntax, semantics and pragmatics.
On doing this research, we have followed the viewpoint of linguistics
in doing an investigation into common ways for translating euphemism from
English into Vietnamese and found out the main approaches taken by
translators in translating euphemism from English into Vietnamese.
2.2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.2.1 Theory of Translation
2.2.1.1 Definitions of Translation
Translation, by dictionary definition, consists of changing from one
form to another, to turn into one 'own or another' language (The Merriam Webster Dictionary, 1974). Some authors have given the following different
definitions of translation:
6
In the book “A Linguistic Theory of Translation”, Catford [25] defines
that translation is not a dangerous technique in itself provided its nature is
understood, and its use is carefully controlled and translation is in itself a
valuable skill to be imparted to students. Furthermore, translation is an
operation performed in languages and also a process of substituting a text in
one language for a text in another. More specifically, translation is the
replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by equivalent textual
material in another language (TL).
Benjamin [61] states that translation goes beyond enriching the
language and culture of a country which it contributes to, beyond renewing
and maturing the life of the original text, beyond expressing and analyzing the
most intimate relationships of languages with each other and becomes a way
of entry into a universal language.
Other researchers, Meetham and Hudsan [45, p.53] mention that
translation is the replacement of a presentation of a text in one language by a
presentation of equivalent text in a second language.
According to B. Hatim & I. Mason [32, p.3], translation is a process,
involving the negotiation of meaning between producers and receivers of
texts. In other words, the resulting translated text is to be seen as the evidence
of a transaction, a means of retracting the pathways of the translator’s
decision-makings.
Another author, Nguyễn Hồng Cổn [11] mentions that the activity of
translation is still a language activity and language plays core and basic roles.
However, he says that together with the attention to linguistic problem,
translators also need to pay attention to the problems relating to the SL and
TL such as social environment, culture and religion.
7
Furthermore, Vũ Văn Đại [20] claims that there is an unequivalence in
culture of translators and original texts, so in order to become good
translators, it is very necessary to enrich the cultural and national knowledge
of the TL.
Peter Newmark’s theory [48] is different from the point of view of
above mentioned authors. He defines that translation is rendering the meaning
of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text.
Briefly, the starting point of translation is a message. This message is
expressed in a specific language, which is called the SL. When doing
translation, we aim to re-express that message in another language (TL). We
have already known that the form of each language is unique. Thus,
translation will involve some changes of form. This does not matter provided
that that the meaning of the message is retained unchanged. Moreover,
translation not only involves understanding the general meaning of the
communication but also calls upon the ability to understand the culture of the
communication. Before we can translate a message, we must understand the
total meaning of the message within its own cultural context.
2.2.1.2. Language and Culture
Dealing with language and culture, Whorf
who endorsed Sapir’s
theory declares firmly that “No language can exist unless it is steeped in the
context of culture; and no culture of natural language.” [24, p.14]. Language,
then, is the heart within the body of culture, and it is the interaction between
the two that results in the continuation of life energy. In the same way that the
surgeon, operating on the heart, cannot neglect the body that surrounds it, so
the translator treats the text in isolation from the culture at his peril.
According to Claire Kramsch [41, p.37], language is the principle
means whereby we conduct our social lives. When it is used in contexts of
8
communication, it is bound up with culture in multiple and complex ways.
“Language expresses cultural reality” as the words people utter refer to
common experience. They express facts, ideas or events that are
communicable because they refer to a stock of knowledge about the world
that other people share. “Language embodies cultural reality through all its
verbal and nonverbal aspects”. People also create experience through
language. They give meaning to it through the medium they choose to
communicate with one other, for example, speaking on the telephone or faceto-face, writing a letter or sending an email message. The way they use
spoken, written, or visual medium itself creates meanings that are
understandable to the group they belong. Language is a system of signs that is
seen that having itself a cultural value. “Language symbolizes cultural
reality” as speakers identify themselves and other through their use of
language; they use their language as a symbol of their social identity.
Edward Sapir claims that “language is a guide to social reality” and
that human beings are at the mercy of the language that has become the
medium of expression for their society. Experience, he asserts, is largely
determined by the language habits of the community, and each separate
structure represents a separate reality. He also affirms that “no two languages
are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social
reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not
merely the same world, with different labels attached.” [24, p.13]
Peter Newmark [49, p.94] indicates that culture is the way of life and
its manifestations that are peculiar to a community that uses a particular
language as its means of expression. Frequently, where there is cultural focus,
there is a translation problem due to the cultural “gap” or “distance” between
the SL and TL.
9
2.2.1.3. Translation Equivalence
Equivalence can be said to be the central issue in translation although
its definition, relevance, and applicability within the field of translation theory
have caused heated controversy, and many different theories of the concept of
equivalence have been elaborated within this problem. Translation
equivalence occurs when a SL and a TL text or item are relatable to (at least
some of) the same features of substance. The greater the number of situational
features common to the contextual meanings of both SL and TL texts, the
“better” the translation.
According to Peter Newmark, translation equivalence is an unwritten
rule about translation which people know and which influences the form of
translating exchange. “Translation equivalence will not be achieved word for
word, collocation for collocation, clause for clause, sentence for sentence, but
possibly only paragraph for paragraph, or, rarely, text for text. For this
reason, translation equivalence, like the term ‘unit of translation’, is
sometimes a useful operational concept, but it can be only roughly and
approximately indicated for a stretch of language.” [49, p.123]
Mentioning
translation
equivalence, Eugene
Nida
[51,
p.26]
distinguishes two types of equivalence: formal equivalence and dynamic
equivalence. Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in
both form (poetry to poetry, sentence to sentence, concept and concept) and
content (gloss translation, aim to allow the reader to understand as much of
the SL context as possible). However, dynamic equivalence is based on the
principle of equivalent effect, i.e. that the relationship between receiver and
message should aim at being the same as that between the original receivers
and the SL message.
10
J.C. Catford [25, p. 47] claims that SL and TL texts or items are
translation equivalents when they are interchangeable in a given situation.
Catford's approach to translation equivalence clearly differs from that adopted
by Nida since Catford had a preference for a more linguistic-based approach
to translation and this approach is based on the linguistic work of Firth and
Halliday. Catford proposed very broad types of translation in terms of three
criteria: the extent of translation (full translation vs. partial translation); the
grammatical rank at which the translation equivalence is established (rankbound translation vs. unbounded translation); the levels of language involved
in translation (total translation vs. restricted translation).
Moreover, Popovic [23, p.25] distinguishes translation equivalence
into four types:
(1) Linguistic equivalence, where there is homogeneity on the linguistic
level of both SL and TL texts, i.e. word for word translation.
(2) Paradigmatic equivalence, where there is equivalence of the
elements of a paradigmatic expressive axis, i.e. elements of grammar, which
Popovic sees as being a higher category than lexical equivalence.
(3) Stylistic (translational) equivalence, where there is “functional
equivalence of elements in both original and translation aiming at an
expressive identity with an invariant of identical meaning”.
(4) Textual (syntagmatic) equivalence, where there is equivalence of
the syntagmatic structuring of a text, i.e. equivalence of form and shape.
In trying to solve the problem of translation equivalence, Newbert [47]
postulates that translation equivalence must be considered a semiotic category
consisting of the components (syntactic, semantic and pragmatic). These
components are arranged in a hierarchical relationship, where semantic
equivalence takes priority over syntactic equivalence and pragmatic
11
equivalence conditions and modifies both the other elements. Equivalence
overall results from the relation between signs themselves, the relationship
between signs what they stand for and those who use them.
In general, to achieve translation equivalence requires translators to
produce the same effect (or one as close as possible) on the readership of the
translation as was obtained on the readership of the original. The translation
equivalence is showed in some rules and principles which are very useful for
the translators. The focus is to assure the equivalence in translation of
participants for translating to take place smoothly and effectively. These
principles help people best achieve their goals not only in communication but
also in translating: exchanging information and establishing and maintaining
social relations.
2.2.1.4. Translation Methods
In order to have a good translated version, the translator should have
knowledge about translation theory. When we mention translation, we also
refer to a process which involves the negotiation of meaning between
producers and receivers of texts. Translation plays such an important role in
life that there have been many researchers who mention it with many different
methods.
Peter Newmark [49, p.24] mentions the difference between translation
methods and translations. He indicates that, "While translation methods relate
to whole texts, translations are used for sentences and the smaller units of
language". He goes on to refer to the following methods of translation:
(1) Word-for-word translation: is the process the SL word order is
preserved and the words translated singly by their most common meanings,
out of context.
12
(2) Literal translation: is the process the SL grammatical constructions
are converted to their nearest TL equivalents, but the lexical words are again
translated singly, out of context.
(3) Faithful translation: it attempts to produce the precise contextual
meaning of the original within the constraints of the TL grammatical
structures.
(4) Semantic translation: differs from “faithful translation” only in as
far as it must take more account of the aesthetic value of the SL texts.
(5) Adaptation: is the freest form of translation, and is used mainly for
plays (comedies) and poetry; the themes, characters, plots are usually
preserved, the SL culture is converted to the TL culture and the text is
rewritten.
(6) Free translation: it produces the TL texts without the style, form, or
content of the original.
(7) Idiomatic translation: it reproduces the “message” of the original
but tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and
idioms where these do not exist in the original.
(8) Communicative translation: it attempts to render the exact
contextual meaning of the original in such a way that both content and
language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the readership.
Mentioning linguistic aspects of translation, Roman Jakobson [38, p.
232-239] distinguishes three types of translation:
(1) Intralingual translation, or rewording (an interpretation of verbal
signs by means of other signs in the same language)
(2) Interlingual translation or translation proper (an interpretation of
verbal signs by means of some other language)
13
(3) Intersemiotic translation or transmutation (an interpretation of
verbal signs by means of nonverbal sign systems.)
The translation in these three types properly describes the process of
transferring from the SL to the TL. He goes on immediately to point to the
central problem in all types: while messages may serve as adequate
interpretations of code units or messages, there is ordinarily no full
equivalence through translation.
Engene Nida [51] provides the model of the translation process
consisting of the following stages:
SL
TL
TEXT
TRANSLATION
Analysis
Restructuring
Transfer
For example:
SL
TL
HELLO
ÇA VA?
Friendly greeting on arrival
Decision to distinguish between forms
of greeting available
Transfer
Firth [24, p. 22] defines meaning as “a complex of relations of various
kinds between the component terms of a context of situation”. He points out
that, in determining what to use in English, the translators must:
- Xem thêm -