Tài liệu Translation theory and practice

Translation: Theory and Practice, Tension and Interdependence American Translators Association Scholarly Monograph Series (ATA) As of 1993 John Benjamins has been the official publisher of the ATA Scholarly Monograph Series. Edited by Françoise Massardier-Kenney, under the auspices of the American Translators Association, this series has an international scope and addresses research and professional issues in the translation community worldwide. These accessible collections of scholarly articles range from issues of training, business environments, to case studies or aspects of specialized translation relevant to translators, translator trainers, and translation researchers. Managing Editor Françoise Massardier-Kenney Kent State University (Kent, Ohio) Editorial Advisory Board Marilyn Gaddis Rose Binghamton University NY Peter W. Krawutschke Western Michigan University (Kalamazoo) †Marian B. Labrum Brigham Young University (Provo, Utah) Marshall Morris University of Puerto Rico (Rio Piedras, P.R.) Sue Ellen Wright Institute for Applied Linguistics, Kent State University (Kent, Ohio) Volume V Translation: Theory and Practice, Tension and Interdependence Edited by Mildred L. Larson Translation: Theory and Practice, Tension and Interdependence Edited by Mildred L. Larson University of Texas at Arlington John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam / Philadelphia 4- The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48–1984. Library of Congress Cataloging Serial Number 87-658269 ISBN 978 90 272 3180 2 (Hb; alk. paper) © 2008 John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia Published 1991 by the University Center at Binghamton (SUNY) ISSN 0890-4111 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Company • P.O. Box 36224 • 1020 me Amsterdam • The Netherlands John Benjamins North America • P.O. Box 27519 • Philadelphia, PA 19118-0519 • USA American Translators Association Series TRANSLATION THEORY AND PRACTICE Volume V 1991 Contents Editor's Note: The Interdependence of Theory and Practice 1 MILDRED L LARSON Section 1. What Happens When One Translates Seeking Synapses: Translators Describe Translating 5 MARILYN GADDIS ROSE Translation and the Space Between: Operative Parameters of an Enterprise 13 MICHAEL S C O T T DOYLE Some Images and Analogies for the Process of Translation ALEX G R O S S 27 Section 2. Some Theoretical Aspects of Translation The Unit of Translation Revisited 38 ROSA RABADAN The Soviet Concept of Time and Space 49 LAUREN G. LEIGHTON Ever Since Yan Fu and his Criteria of Translation 63 FAN SHOUYI Categorization and Translation 71 MARCEL THELEN Section 3. Translating Non-prose Genres The Translation of Poetry 87 B U R T O N RAFFEL Opera Translation 100 MARK HERMAN AND R O N N I E AFTER Translation and Social Discourse: Shakespeare, A Playwright after Quebec's Heart 120 A N N I E BRISSET Cultural Transfers in the Translating of Humor 139 HENRY NIEDZIELSKI Section 4. Putting Theory to Practice Translation in Theory and Practice 157 JEAN-PAUL VINAY Semantic and Communicative Translation: Two Approaches, One Method 172 SERGIO V I A G G I O A Communication-Oriented Analysis of Quality in NonLiterary Translation and Interpretation 188 DANIEL GILE Checking Translation for Meaning ELLIS W. DEIBLER, JR. 201 Section 5. Language Specific Issues in Translation Translation of Prose Fiction from English to Hebrew: A Function of Norms (1960s and 1970s) 206 RACHEL WEISSBROD The Translator as Editor: Beginnings and Endings in Japanese-English Translation 224 JUDY WAKABAYASHI Section 6. Translation in the University Setting Case Studies in Teaching Translation 235 HEIDRUN GERZYMISCH-ARBOGAST A N D URSULA SCHNATMEYER Human Rights Applied to Translation: A Case for Language Learners' Right to Translate 254 FRANCISCO G O M E S DE M A T O S Contributors ATA Corporate Members ATA Institutional Members ATA Officers and Board of Directors, 1991 260 263 267 269 Editor's Note: The Interdependence of Theory and Practice M I L D R E D L. L A R S O N Good theory is based on information gained from practice. Good practice is based on carefully worked-out theory. The two are interdependent Along with the interdependence there is tension. In order for a violin to make beautiful music, the string must be taut; that is, there must be just the right tension. Similarly, in order for a translation to be "beautiful," the proper tension between theory and practice must be achieved. There has been a long-standing discussion of whether translation is science or art. This also is part of the tension. It is both. Linguistics, the study of language as part of culture, and art, the application of skill and taste to production according to aesthetic principles,1 are interdependent, just as theory and practice are. Translators who work with only two or three languages may not be as aware of the need for well thought-out theory as those whose work involves many languages. They learn the "rules" that affect the equivalent forms and leave the rest to their excellent knowledge of the two languages. However, those of us who are training potential translators who do not even know what language they will learn when they go overseas are much more concerned that we have a strong theoretical base for the teaching of translation principles. It was pardy for this reason that I accepted the challenge of editing this volume. The excellent response from colleagues has given us a wide range of topics, and yet, in a real sense, all address the interdependence of theory and practice. The authors who have contributed are persons who know the impor­ tance of both theory and practice and the tension between the two. Most have also struggled with how to best communicate the things they have 2 □ Editor's Note learned to beginning translators. We note, as we look at the material that has been written on translation theory and practice, that the books of particular significance are often written by persons who, in addition to being translators themselves, are also teachers of translation. There are many who translate quite well who have not struggled with the problem of writing down exactly what it is that they do, much less developing an articulate theory of the linguistic, cultural, and aesthetic aspects of translation. In this volume, however, we have a collection of articles by those who are aware of the importance of putting these con­ cerns in writing. Theory involves trying to understand and account for what happens in the process of translating. Only practitioners can tell us what this process is all about We begin this volume with four graphic descriptions of what happens when one translates. Marilyn Gaddis Rose, basing her discussion on research involving feedback from translators, calls the process one of synapses. Michael Scott Doyle sees translation as an enterprise—difficult, complicated, and risky—with centripetal and centrifugal pulls of the source and target texts. Some excellent diagrams help the reader visualize the process. Finally, Alex Gross suggests some rather unusual images and analogies such as fishing, toys, and music. In section 2, we look at some very specific aspects of translation theory. Rosa Rabadan, with a background in European translation theory, tackles the question of the unit of translation, discussing the issues from several approaches and concluding that there is a unit, which she calls a transleme, a functional-relational unit established between the source and target texts. Next Lauren G. Leighton brings to our attention the Soviet school of translation, dealing especially with the matter of source texts that are remote in space (cultural differences) and in time (a different time in history) from the target audience. Fan Shouyi presents the debate in China concerning criteria of translation—Yan Fu's "faithfulness," "readabil­ ity," and "refinedness." Last in this section, Marcel Thelen, who has a keen interest in the theory of meaning and its application to translation, discusses the lexicon in a model called "two-cycle model of grammar.” In section 3, we have excellent examples of the practical application of theory in four specialist fields: poetry, opera, drama, and humor. Each genre has challenges for the translator. Burton Raffel underlines the unique problems and opportunities of the translator of poetry and emphasizes that to do effective translation the translator must go beyond a knowledge of the languages to a knowledge of their poetic traditions. Moreover, “the MILDRED L. LARSON □ 3 translator must himself be a poet” Mark Herman and Ronnie Apter, collaborating in their article as they have collaborated in the translation of musical stage works and television productions, take us into the complicat­ ed aspects of translating musical works, which involves not just words, but also prosody, fitting the words to the music. Annie Brisset with wide experience in FrenchXEnglish translation, demonstrates that translation for the stage, Shakespeare in this case, is dependent on the wider context of the society for which the translation is being prepared. Last in section 3 is Henry Niedzielski's study of the cultural aspects of translating humor, based on research done in the diverse situations of the University of Bonn and the University of Hawaii. As we consider the translation of a given genre, we become increasingly aware of the interdependence of theory and practice. Whole new areas of consideration not encountered in translating simple prose present themselves. In section 4 Jean-Paul Vinay, with extensive experience in English> English slightly edged Spanish>English (16>15). German>English was on a par with English>Spanish and English>French (6 each). Most of the respondents are versatile in the types of translating they do. However, 67 percent identified themselves as chiefly literary translators (38 respon­ dents), and 74 percent of them (28 respondents) preferred to translate prose. Several respondents wrote responses of a thoughtfulness and depth that call for separate publication; I will not pre-empt their originality and incisiveness here. What they go through can be summarized in terms of the three steps mentioned above—comprehension, transfer, expression. A. Step 1: Comprehending the Source Text Comprehending the source text is the serious professional's first task. Veritably all such translators use the first scanning and reading for pre-problem solving. Some start right in, but reading the piece in its entirety is the clear preference. Depending on the practical, personal time schedule, transferring begins almost as soon as the second text-encounter; and as it does, it begins to alter comprehension, sometimes momentarily eroding it Twenty-three respondents said the text is always harder than they expected on their first reading. The difficulties are not necessarily psychological and internal. Cultural differences, technical (terminological) difficulties, and author-related eccentricities were cited by four respondents. B. Step 2. The Actual Transfer Transfer, the neurons making contact, is under way. If there are no problems, we are not aware of any particular strain on our part. That is, we look at the source text and effortlessly will a target text into existence. There is an extraordinarily fleeting sense of irrevocability, even though we know we may make coundess revisions. If we try to slow ourselves down, we may feel we are looking about in a dark gray area lit with little glowing bars, like fireflies, and that what comes out in target guise is fixed. And in a sense we are correct. There is no possible reversal of the neuron contact: it is unidirectional. Revision uses a different action, a different attitude, possibly a different area of our brain. The first draft, or a revision made 8 □ Seeking Synapses so long afterwards that it means starting ab ovo, requires coding one's brain to work at high intensity. Editing an extremely deficient translation by someone else can provoke similar sensations. 1 • BLOCKS. Fatigue or stressful interruptions can affect even regularly rhythmed, unhesitating transferring. The two languages seem to be on parallel or competing tracks, and our brain simply cannot muster the energy to force them into channels that will allow satisfactory contact. And this is when translators' defenses and strategies come into play. The brain has to be coaxed into operating at peak. No respondent specifically recommended napping, although outright exhaustion was frequently cited as a mental block. Rather, they suggested such other means for resting the mind like exercise, especially jogging and walking, and tasks calling for different kinds of attention. Above all, translators prefer to put the transla­ tion aside and do something else, letting the mind heal itself in quies­ cence. For when exhausted, some minds seem to be truly blank and numb. There are no neurons in sight, trench-coated or otherwise, and there are certainly no fireflies. Other minds seem packed with grey cotton wool; nothing is moving. 2. TRIGGERING MECHANISMS. Delay in triggering time does not always permit putting the translation aside. The translator has to keep working. Most respondents suggested self-therapy of one kind or another. Forty-seven noted that if it is a question of a recalcitrant word or idiom, they simply leave a blank and return to the passage later, if only a few minutes later. This interlude often suffices for their brain to find an effective triggering mechanism all by itself. Two respondents confessed to sudden illuminations, almost literally like a host of fireflies or electric torches, certainly like a Joycean Epiphany. All respondents said that they have developed systematic triggering techniques. The dictionary is the most reliable and least mysterious, even when, perhaps especially when, it does not have exacdy what we are looking for. It triggers the word the respond­ ent already knew but could not access. Role-playing is also cited as a mechanism for triggering what is already known but resistant to access. 3. REIATION BETWEEN SOURCE AND TARGET. There is a wide range in the respondents' awareness of severance from the source. Twenty-nine respondents noted that they always try to keep an emerging text in tandem with the original. (It seems reasonable to assume that keeping materials for contact in close range is a neutral function of the transferring.) Five others said that they keep links but that the two texts are discrete. But three said that they move to severance immediately, MARILYN GADDIS ROSE □ 9 discarding the source text as "used, "consumed," or "co-opted." Thirteen believed that they experience severance as ongoing; they may, in fact, be experiencing the same phenomenon but feel it as gradual. Four more stay connected with the source either until the project is completed—or until after one or more drafts is done. C. Step 3: Expression After forming an expression of the material in the target language, translators do not report reliving the experience of transfer when returning to it after some lapse of time. Once the transfer is made, the translator is severed from the original, and the process is irreversible. Clifford Landers, translator of contemporary Brazilian prose, noted that he recognizes his own style but that some passages "may strike [him] as having been done by someone else." He reasons persuasively that he has been changing in the interim, as any translator would, while the work has not been chang­ ing. Aliki Dragona, translator of Modern Greek fiction, has perhaps the most typical reaction: she wants to start editing. Seventeen respondents said that they are critical of their own work when they see it again. But a nearly equal number of others are pleased to see what they did earlier. This does not mean that step 3 is not beset with its own challenges and affective complications. Translators, it should be no surprise to learn, love language and usually profess a particular affection for the languages they work in. The situation in which they acquired their preferred source language is instrumental, according to 41 respondents. Lauren G. Leighton, theorist and translator of Russian literature, was sent to Monterey Institute of International Studies in California as a high school graduate. He says, "Russian chose me, not me it." It sounds coercive, but it was apparendy an anagnorisis of sorts. Now he feels "there's not enough time in a day or a life to do all that I want to do with and for Russian litera­ ture." Landers, likewise, is typical of the generally enthusiastic respond­ ents: "I feel a sense of mission as a transmitter of culture . . . I love Brazil and find it's a vibrant, life-affirming culture." But is translation more than three procedural steps? In July 1989, I had a covert motive: to find out whether translators experience a differend á la Lyotard.4 Whether or not they do is now relatively irrelevant in view of the richness of the responses. And even if they do experience it (wheth­ er or not differend would be the most appropriate label for what they 10 □ Seeking Synapses experience), that is likewise irrelevant As a matter of fact, I think some of us, but by no means all of us, do experience this. What is relevant is that almost all responding translators were aware of a real internal, if infinitesimal, space. They are, by and large, uncom­ fortable in it It is an unstable inner space where, in the confusion, things risk seeming lost Therefore, translators try to make their passage through this space as brief as possible. As a result, I now have an enviable catalog of tips for blitzing over, under, around, and through it. Best of all, pre­ sumably, for most of the respondents, are the tips for hoodwinking the mind into acting as if this ritual of passage were not happening (i.e., no passage through because nothing to pass through exists). Most of us want to put the message in its attache case, race to the contact, and put it down in its new guise. We can worry about the message there, but it has ceased to be an unstable burden. Only one respondent, Gabriela Mahn, Spanish and Nahuad translator, looked at the moments of that movement through Orphic space head-on. "My mind seems to go blank,'' she mused, "but actually these are the moments of more intense thought." "Too frustrating" was the usual dismissive classification of this passagetime and passage-space. It was too tense, alternately too terrifying and too exhilarating to want to recall fully, but sufficiendy addictive or seductive to ensure voluntary repetition. Respondent Helen Kolias, Modern Greek translator, tellingly predict­ ed, "I think the answers will show that translating is not a neutral activity and (that) the translator is never completely innocent" Guilty or innocent, guileless or beguiling, most of us do not intend to stop translating. All we can do is be vigilant for bias in the text or bias associated with the author; bias in the source community; our own bias, and the bias in the target community. "Bias" here includes not only ideology but also the prevailing taste and concomitant rhetorical norms. "Vigilance" here means not just self-monitoring and sensitivity but attention to detail. All those old-fashioned concepts: facts, accuracy, meaning. If we add flair to vigi­ lance, we have encompassed creativity and talent. In vigilance and flair we have, I believe, found the inclusive qualities for the translator's multiple personae. Now I do not know of any successful translator who lacks vigilance and flair. And I know plenty of successful translators who are at best bemused by translation theory. Yet most translators are willing to discuss their experiences and practices conceptually, even somewhat abstracdy. MARILYN GADDIS ROSE □ 11 Most are willing to conjure up fascinating and perceptive metonyms: Benjamin's pane of glass, archeologist's shards, or Peden's apple orchard. Derrida, picking up on Steiner's After Babel, returns to Benjamin with Les Tours de Babel So, why do we translate? Why do we willingly subject our minds to this search for the synapse and the panic-inducing near-miss experience? The answer, I believe, lies in that sense of hard-won accomplishment after excitement and checkmate. Lyotard (1983:29, see Note 4, below) in describing the experience of the language game in proposition 23 of Le Differend is actually describing our drama of the mind in among the inner boundaries of text and translation. Besides the pain of not being able to use language as we expect to, there is the pleasure of being able to invent a new idiom. When we turn our vigilance and flair inward, we can almost watch ourselves translating. What we can almost see may look mysterious, but when we watch, we can often help ourselves. NOTES 1. O r if Emily Dickinson is more accessible, remember that the "Brain is wider than the s k y / . . . deeper than the sea,'' 2. In Les Mots et les Choses ("The Order of Things,'' trans, anon. Paris: Gallimard, 1966). 3. Questionnaire: (1) How would you describe your comprehension of a text on the first reading? E.g., do you read it solely as a text in language 1? Do you begin translating? What is typically your initial assessment of text difficulties? (2) Once you have settled in to begin, does your comprehension of the text undergo any changes? E.g., does it seem harder than you had realized at first? Do you encounter transfer difficulties (i.e., something you are confident you understand in the source language but cannot make understandable in the target language? (3) Do you experience blocks? E.g., you know you know the right word in your own language but the word eludes you? (This is different from outright not-knowing a word in the source language or being baffled by what the source author is trying to say.) (4) How would you describe your state of mind at such moments? (5) How do you overcome blocks? Do you rely on a dictionary for triggering? Do you do role-playing? 12 □ Seeking Synapses Do you check with a fellow language user? (e.g., what do we call the thing which . . . etc.?) (6) Do your inner resources overcome the block quasi-consciously? If so, describe this overcoming. (7) At what point in your translating does your translation seem severed from the source text? Or do the two remain in tandem? (8) If you return to a translation done some time in the past (but one considered satisfactory), is it dead? severed? unrelated to the original? estranged from you? or you from it? (9) Do you have special, affective attitudes towards the language(s) you use? Can these attitudes be explained by the situation in which you learned the language? the domi­ nant culture of use? the subjects which you usually translate in these languages? (10) Do you give your languages equality? or hierarchize them? Can this status be explained by the situation in which you learned the language? the dominant culture of use? the subjects which you usually translate in these languages? (11) Comments: Language Pair(s): Preferred Genre: Name (optional): 4. Jean-François Lyotard, Le Différend (Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1983); trans. George Van Den Abeele (University of Minnesota, 1988). See my "Translation and Language Games," Hermeneutics and the Poetic Motion, ed. Dennis J. Schmidt, Translation Perspectives 5 (1990).