1 / 18

WHY STUDENTS’ TRANSLATIONS TEND TO BE LONGER

WHY STUDENTS’ TRANSLATIONS TEND TO BE LONGER. THAN PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATIONS? Amelia Mareva New Bulgarian University, Sofia BETA 2009. Rationale and objectives. Main aims and objectives:

rainer
Download Presentation

WHY STUDENTS’ TRANSLATIONS TEND TO BE LONGER

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WHY STUDENTS’ TRANSLATIONS TEND TO BE LONGER THAN PROFESSIONAL TRANSLATIONS? Amelia Mareva New Bulgarian University, Sofia BETA 2009

  2. Rationale and objectives Main aims and objectives: • to explore the relationship between translation length and students’ use of explicitation/implicitation strategies • to report the design and results of a small-scale empirical study • to discuss the interdependence between translation competence/expertise and the employment of explicitation/implicitation strategies as well as to highlight some implications for translation pedagogy

  3. The context • The growing importance of both translation and English as a lingua franca in today’s knowledge society calls for establishing new links between the fields of Translation Studies and English Language Learning The diversity paradox: the apparent contradiction between the rise of English as an international lingua franca, which should lead to lesser linguistic diversity, and increased use of translation, which should produce greater linguistic diversity (Pym 2001:28) • The nature of professional competence, expertise and excellence: the explicitation/implicitation ratio as the touchstone of the translator’s craftsmanship • Some practical/financial implications of the question of translation length: ever more frequently translators are paid per word in the source language

  4. Research hypotheses: • There is a regular (systematic) relationship between students’ use of explicitation/implicitation in translation and their level of linguistic proficiency and management of achievement strategies. • The explicitation/implicitation ratio can be a function of the translator’s amount of translation experience. • Students’ model of translation, and specifically of translation quality, is an “explicitation” model.

  5. Translation length Measure unit: The graphic word: unproblematic – a large number of words problematic – the/a, isn’t, waist-high The lexeme: unproblematic – the great majority of lexemes problematic – take hold of, Tootsie Roll Explicitation obligatory: mostly grammatical optional: predominantly lexical hard-working men – работеха здраво; мъже които работят усърдно …in their Sundaybest – най-хубавите си дрехи; в най-хубавите си неделни дрехи; пременени за неделна служба; облечени в най-хубавите си дрехи Implicitation obligatory: mostly grammatical optional: predominantly lexical my mother said she suspected… –майка ми подозираше; майка ми каза, че подозира I happened to be riding with him – аз се возех с него; ако се случеше така, че и аз да съм с него There is a tendency for all good translations to be somewhat longer than the originals. This does not mean, of course, that that all good translations are necessarily long.Eugene Nida (1974:163)Le traducteur allonge par prudence et aussi par ignorance. Vinay and Darbelnet (1958)

  6. Theoretical framework (1) Explicitation can be defined as • a process (strategy, technique) by which the translator makes explicit in the target text information, which is only implicit in the source language • a translation universal Blum-Kulka’s explicitation hypothesis (1986:20-21): Translations are usually more explicit than source texts, especially those by non-professional translators. Inexperienced translators produce more explanatory/redundant texts: the less experienced the translator, the more the process of translation is made obvious. Qualitative exploratory studies (manual corpus): Alexieva (1982), Séguinot (1988), Kamenicka (2008), Klaudy (1993), Mareva (1993), Pym (2001), Quantitavite explanatory studies (computer corpus): Øveras (1998), Olohan and Baker (2000), Frankenberg-Garcia (2004), Englund-Dimitrova (2005)

  7. Theoretical framework (2) The present study is an attempt to analyse optional/voluntary explicitation and implicitation from the perspective of text length; hence, it is concerned with the processes of addition and omission of lexemes. • Explicitation – addition of lexemes, a one-to-many relationship • Implicitation – omission of lexemes, a many-to one relationship

  8. Method • Data collection – controlled word count (Mareva 1993, Frankenberg-Garcia 2004) • Identification procedure and classification: types of explicitation and implicitation (Mareva 1993) • Quantitative and qualitative findings: interpretation and evaluation (the ‘plication quotient’ Kamenicka 2008)

  9. Group 1. 22 fourth-year students (7th semester) at New Bulgarian University C1.2 or C2.1 EL proficiency 720 hours of language instruction and 210 hours translation training, advanced computer skills good knowledge of Bulgarian literary norms Group 2. 25 third-year students (6th semester) at Sofia University C2 EL proficiency 750 hours of language instruction and 240 hours translation education good computer skills very good knowledge of Bulgarian literary norms Participants: 47 undergraduate students

  10. Material and activities Genre: Literary prose Authors: John Grisham’s A Painted House Mark Crick’s Kafka’s Soup: Lamb with Dill Sauce à la Raymond Chandler Professional translators: Zornitsa Dimova Pavlina Chohadzhieva Sample size/Length: A manageable amount of 1,000 words running SL text Tasks and activities: Stage 1. In-class activities: close/deep reading, problem spotting, discussion of literacy/publication norms Stage 2. Out-of-class activities: researching information, draft translation Stage 3. Proof-reading, (peer-)editing, revising; critical analysis of professional translations, discussion of translator’s style

  11. Сръбнах глътка “уиски сауър”, загасих си фаса в кухненската дъска за рязане и загледах някаква буболечка как се опитва да изпълзи от мивката. Това, което ми трябваше, беше маса в ресторант „Максим”, стотачка и удивително красива блондинка; а вместо това разполагах с агнешки джолан и пълна липса на улики… 49 words Сръбнах от уискито с лимон, загасих си цигарата в кухненската дъска и погледах как една хлебарка се мъчи да издрапа от мивката. Исках маса в „Максим”, сто кинта и разкошна блондинка, а имах само един агнешки бути никакви улики... 40 words I sipped on my whisky sour, ground out my cigarette on the chopping board and watched a bug trying to crawl out of the basin. I needed a table at Maxim’s, a hundred bucks and a gorgeous blonde; what I had was a leg of lamb and no clues. I took hold of the joint. It felt cold and damp, like a coroner’s handshake.

  12. Some examples whisky sour: “уиски сауър”; уиски с лимон; коктейл с уиски (I) needed: исках; нуждаех се от; имах нужда от; това, което ми трябваше no clues: никаква улика; пълна липса на улики; не знаех как да приготвя; нямах никаква идея какво да го правя sliced: накълцах; накълцах на търкалца; накълцах на филии; нарязах на шайби onion: лук; глава лук; една глава лук

  13. Data and results Text 1.ST: 1002 graphic words; 881 lexemes TT (P): 852 graphic words; 828 lexemes TT (S1): 909 graphic words; 871 lexemes TT (S2): 883 graphic words; 859 lexemes Explicitation shifts: TT(P): 22; TT (S1): 8 + 23 = 31; TT (S2): 14 + 13 =27 Implicitation shifts: TT(P): 31; TT (S1): 7 + 2 = 9 TT (S2): 11 Explication/implication quotient: TT(P):0.71 ; TT (S1): 3.44 TT (S2): 2.45 Text 2.ST: 385 graphic words; 348 lexemes TT (P): 331 graphic words; 319 lexemes TT (S1): 349 graphic words; 334 lexemes TT (S2): 354 graphic words; 337 lexemes Explicitation shifts: TT(P): 17; TT (S1): 13 + 11 =24; TT (S2): 14 + 9 =23 Implicitation shifts: TT(P): 10; TT (S1): 4 + 1 = 5; TT (S2): 5 + 1 = 6 Explication/implication quotient: TT(P):1.7 ; TT (S1): 4.8 TT (S2): 3.83 * ST – source text TT – target text

  14. Explicitation and implicitation shifts Professional translation – TT (P) Students’ translation (group 1) – TT (S1) Students’ translation (group 2) – TT (S2)

  15. Why are students’ translations longer than professional translations? • Students’ understanding of the nature of translation: a good translation should reproduce “everything” (i.e. should faithfully render all relevant dictionary and contextual meanings). This study has shown that while the student subjects have resorted to explicitation strategies more frequently than the two professional translators, they have been quite reluctant to employ implicitation strategies: in fact, implicitation shifts are 3 to 4 times fewer in students’ translations. • Students’ insecurity of what is permissible in the process of translation: how much freedom they are allowed. In their view, explicitation is saying the same (not more), whereas implicitation is saying less. • Students’ reluctance to move from a ST orientation (understanding the original) to a TT orientation (achieving a similar effect). Perhaps, years of testing have induced students to attach greater importance to the ST system (to show convincingly that they can interpret the ST) than to the TT system. • In the classic three-stage process of translation: analysis – synthesis – transfer (cf. Nida 1964), the second stage is frequently omitted, which often results in a simplified message. Thus, explicitation can also be viewed as a strategy of simplification.

  16. Conclusions • Explicitation and implicitation are phenomena with a very high frequency of occurrence: in the translations of approximately 1,400 graphic words there are 36 shifts (24 explicitation and 12 implicitation shifts, calculated as arithmetic means). The processes of explicitation and implicitation should be further researched as they offer important insights into the nature and mechanisms of translation. • Although explicitation and implicitation depend on a set of variables: language types, structural and pragmatic characteristics of source texts and target texts, author’s style and translator’s style, etc., one of the most important variables has proven to be the amount of translation experience. Novice translators resort more frequently to explicitation strategies than expert translators, and even more importantly, they are strongly disinclined to use implicitation techniques. Thus, the study has highlighted significant differences in novices’ and experts’ strategic competence. • Some important differences between the expert and non-expert model of translation have been observed. Students’ model sets explanatory goals and presumes a passive readership. Students attempt to reveal every single meaning (and shade of meaning) in surface structures – the more explicit, the better; implicitation is seen to show ‘weakness’ or lack of understanding; no active referencing is expected from the readers • Pedagogical implications: a sustained effort is needed to study and develop both explicitation and implicitation strategies, with a strong focus on the latter

  17. Bibliography Alexieva, B. Implicitation and Explicitation in English and Bulgarian. A Case Study of the Ways of Rendering Auditory Perception. Sofia. 1982. 384 Blum-Kulka, S. Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation,in Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, (eds) House, J. and S.Blum-Kulka, Tübingen, Narr, 1986, p. 17-35 Englund-Dimitrova, B. Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2005 Frankenberg-Garcia, A.Are translations longer than source texts? A corpus-based study of explicitation, in Third International CULT Conference Proceedings, Barcelona, 2004; http://www.linguateca.pt/documentos/Frankenberg-Garcia2004.doc Nida, E and C. Tabor. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Brill, 1974 Vinay, J. P. and J. Darbelnet. Stylistique comparée du français et l'anglais: Méthode de traduction. Didier, Paris, 1958 Kamenicka, R. Explicitation Profile and Translation Style, in Translation research projects, (eds) Pym, A. and A. Perekrestenko. ISG, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, 2008, 117-130

  18. Bibliography Klaudy, K. On explicitation hypothesis, in Transferre necesse est… Current Issues of Translation Theory, (eds) Kohn, J. and K. Klaudy, Szombathely: Dániel Berzsenyi College, 1993 Mareva, A. Kam tipologia na lexikalnija analitizam I sintetizam pri prevod [Towards a Typology of Lexical Analiticity and Syntheticity in Translation, in Sapostavitelno Ezikoznanie [Contrastive linguistics], Sofia, 1993/5, 31-41 Olohan, M. and M.Baker. Reporting that in translated English: Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation? in Across Languages and Cultures, 2000, 1(2): 141-158 Øveras, L. In search of the third code: An investigation of normsin literary translation. Meta 43 (4), 1998, 571–588 Pym, A. Explaining Explicitation,in New Trends in Translation Studies. In Honour of Kinga Klaudy. (eds) Karoly, K. and Á. Fóris, Budapest: Akadémia Kiadó. 2005, 29-34. http://www.tinet.org/~apym/on-line/translation/explicitation_web.pdf Séguinot, C. Pragmatics and the Explicitation Hypothesis, in Traduction, Terminologie, Rédaction 1988,1 (2):106-114.

More Related