Theory of translation
 Скачать 397.98 Kb.
|
Chapter 5. TRANSLATION NORMS AND QUALITY CONTROL OF A TRANSLATION§1. NORMS OF TRANSLATIONThe notion of ‘norms’ in reference to translation is considered to have been first introduced by the Israeli scholar Gideon Toury in the late 1970s.275 This term refers to regularities of translation behavior within a specific sociocultural situation.276 Before the 1970s, translations were evaluated mostly in their comparison with the source text. Toury’s works have shifted attention away from the relationship between individual source and target texts and towards the relationship which exists among the target texts themselves in the context of literary production. Toury’s concept consists of three levels of speaking about a text: competence, norms and performance. Competence is the level of description which allows theorists to list the inventory of options that are available to translators in a given context, that is, a description of what means a translator can use to achieve a goal. To make a good end-text, a translator must be competent in the language reserves s/he can select from. Performance concerns the subset of options the translator actually selects in translation, i. e., what is in fact employed by a translator and how it is employed. Norms are options that translators in a given socio-historical context select on a regular basis, that is, what is typical to use in a particular context. A number of scholars have attempted to explore some of the theoretical aspects of the notion of norms. Many articles on translation norms have been published in Target, the international journal edited by Toury and published since 1989 by John Benjamins. In their investigation, the theorists came to distinguish between norms and conventions. Norms are binding, and obligatory, whereas conventions only express preferences. Norms are divided into constitutive and regulatory. Constitutive norms concern what is or is not accepted as translation. For example, poetry translation does not admit word-for-word translation. Regulatory norms concern what kind of equivalence a translator opts for or achieves. For instance, in poetry translation the functional level of equivalence is obligatory, but the lexical and grammatical similarity of the source and target texts is hardly achieved at all. Further, Chesterman grouped the norms into professional and expectancy norms.277 Professional norms emerge from competent professional behavior and govern the accepted methods and strategies of the translation process. They are sub-divided into three major types:
Expectancy norms are established by the translation receivers’ expectations of what a translation should be like. In attempting to conform to the expectancy norms operating in a given community, a translator will simultaneously be conforming to the professional norms of that community. V. Komissarov described translation norms from a linguistic point of view.278 He classified the norms into translation equivalence norms, genre and style norms, language norms, pragmatic norms, and conventional norms. Translation equivalence norms require as nearly as possible a common sense of the source and target text. When the sense in the target text is transgressed, equivalence norms are completely broken, and the translation is considered unsatisfactory. If a translation is made at a low level of equivalence, the norms are relatively broken, and the translation is regarded as acceptable. Genre and style norms presuppose the correct selection of a text’s predominant function and the preservation of stylistic peculiarities in translation. For example, when translating a scientific or technical text, a translator keeps in mind that the informative, but not expressive function, must prevail, which makes him reduce the expressiveness of the Russian science text as compared with its English original. Language norms mean the correct usage of language in speech (errorless combinability, agreement of words, selection of words, etc.) It is common knowledge that the norms of the source and target language can be different, and a fledging translator, ‘hypnotized’ by the source language norms, sometimes violates the natural flow of the target language text. For example, one text about cowboys’ life included the following sentence: …the exciting chases on horseback with guns blazing, the handsome guitar-strumming cowboys around bonfires and the lovely saloon ladies all made exciting viewing. A student translator did not think much about the grammar links and meanings of some words and his translation was *захватывающие погони на лошадях со стреляющими пистолетами, красивые ковбои, играющие на гитарах, сидя у костра, милые леди салонов – все это приводило в восхищение. This translation is, no doubt, far from exciting. Pragmatic norms require that a translator realize, first and foremost, the pragmatic purpose of the text; the author’s intent must be very close to the communicative effect on the translation receptor. Sometimes the fulfillment of the pragmatic aim may transgress other translation norms, a language norm in particular. A short by John Lennon and its translation by the graduates of the English department (FESU) Maria Boiko and Marianna Karp can illustrate the point. Lennon’s short continues a series of literary parodies on absurd literature, so it is based on agrammatical forms, puns, and nuisance language coinages, which, nevertheless, produce a definite impact on the reader. How this author’s intent is reflected in translation can be seen in comparing the source and the target texts: Nicely Nicely Clive To Clive Barrow it was just an ordinary day nothing unusual or starnge about it, everything quite navel, nothing outstanley, just Очень очень Клайв Для Клайва Бэрроу это был всего лишь день как день ничего страмного или нериличного так ничего себе средненький денек another day but to Roger it was somthing special, a day amongst days … a red lettuce day … because Roger was getting married and as he dressed that morning he thought about the gay batchelor soups he’d had with all his pals. And Clive said nothing. To Roger everything was different, wasn’t this the day his Mother had told him about, in his best suit and all that, grimming and shakeing hands, people tying boots and ricebudda on his car. To have and to harm … till death duty part … he knew it all off by hertz. Clive Barrow seemed oblivious. Roger could visualise Anne in her flowing weddy drag, being wheeled up the aisle, smiling a blessing.He had butterflied in his stomarce as he fastened his bough tie and brushed his hairs. “I hope I’m doing the right thing” he thought looking in the mirror, “Am I good enough for her?” Roger need not have worried because he was “Should I have flowers all round the spokes” said Anne polishing her foot rest. “Or should ничего из наряда вон выходящево просто еще один день но для Роджера это было что-то особенное день из дней … крысный день календаря… потому что это был день его свадьбы и одеваясь утром он думал о веселых холостяцких ужинах съеденных со своими друзьями… А Клайв не сказал ничего. Для Роджера все было по-другому; ни об этом ли дне твердила ему Матушка – в лучшем костюме и все такое, скаля зубы и пожимая руки, люди зашныривают ботинки и засыпают на ходу рисом. Губить и обижать… пока смерть не размочит нас… он знал все это на зубок. А Клайву Бэрроу, казалось, и дела не было. Роджер воображал, как Анна расточая блаженные улыбки катится к нему по проходу в своем праздно разуквашенном свадебном кресле. Когда он завязал галстук бабушкой и рсчесал свои волосинки у него засосало под вилочкой. «Надеюсь, я поступаю правильно», помыслил он, зря в зеркало. «Достоин ли я ее?» зря беспокоился Роджер, ибо он был «стоит ли мне украшать спицы
Сonventional norms are the translation requirements in a certain historical context. The classicist norms of translation required an ‘ideal’ translation with embellishments and decorations. In the period of sentimentalism, a thread of the translator’s life experience as well as his feelings was reflected in translation. These conventions led to free translations. The convention norms to date regard the translation as a substitute of the original text, which requires the maximal similarity of the source and target texts. §2. QUALITY CONTROL OF THE TRANSLATION.Quality control of the translation must be done by the translator, first and foremost, and can be done by an editor, either a hired editor or the translator’s colleague. Giving advice to translators, a experienced British professional translator Geoffrey Samuelsson-Brown suggests the following steps for quality control:279
In evaluating a translation, proof-readers usually mark four types of mistake: distortions, inaccuracies, stylistic drawbacks, and solecisms. Distortion is a blunder marring the sense of the original by describing another situation and, thus, misinforming a receptor. Distortions generally occur because of the translator’s misunderstanding of the text, poor language knowledge, and insufficient background awareness. The often repeated example of machine translation of the biblical text can illustrate the point: The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak translated as Спирт хорош, а мясо протухло. Inaccuracy occurs when a translator mistranslates some detail of the text. Inaccuracies result from misunderstanding a word or a structure. For example, the time of the situation is incorrectly conveyed in the translation of the sentence: Говорят, эта церковь была построена в 14 веке. – *This church is said to be built in the 14th century. The wrong form of the infinitive is the cause of the inaccuracy. Or another example, cited by Nora Gal: the source text tell of an old woman who wants to buy a dog and explains her desire this way: I want something human. – Хочу, чтоб рядом было что-то человеческое. This translation sounds somewhat unnatural in Russian; it would be much better Хочу, чтобы рядом была живая душа.280 Stylistic drawback is a deviation from target language stylistic and semantic norms. Often, this fallacy is due to underestimating translation transformations: e.g., It’s high noon. The sun beats down on the dusty, deserted main street of Dodge City. - * Полдень. Солнце бьет по пыльной пустой улице Додж-Сити. *Солнце палит на безлюдную улицу города Додж-Сити. The translation would be more natural if the student translators used partitioning of the sentence and found another equivalent to the verb: Город Додж-Сити. Главная улица пустынна. Стоящее в зените солнце жжет нещадно. Solecism is a syntactical error resulting from breaking structural norms of the target language because of the translator’s illiteracy or because of source language interference. Another citation from Nora Gal’s experience: И никто не увидит нас вернувшимися обратно. Evidently, the translator meant Никто нас больше не увидит. (Мы не вернемся обратно.) If a translated text is meant to be published, the translator is sure to deal with an editor, the central figure in the publishing industry. Some experienced translators become eventually editors of publishing companies (Nora Gal, Ivan Kashkin281 and others). Generally, the editor’s tasks are as follows:
The editor is a conductor of the publishing house strategies. S/he oversees that the translated text meet all the proper norms and requirements. One of the exemplary editors of the time was Alexandre Blok who required that translators show the author’s individual style in the natural flow of the target discourse.282 To perform his/her role successfully, the editor must be very competent, even more experienced than a translator. It is desirable that the editor know two languages (unfortunately, sometimes publishing companies have only monolingual editors, editing translations haphazardly). Normally, editors check translations into their native tongue, in which stylistic, semantic and syntactic resources they are completely proficient. An intelligent, patient and benevolent editor is a real help and mentor to a translator. The editor has the right to insist on emending the text, but it is the translator who is responsible for the target text, not the editor. The translator, after all, comes to a consensus with the editor, or rejects his comment. It is as illegal for a translator to emendate by him/herself the text, already checked by the editor, as for an editor to alter the target text without the translator’s consent. It is essential that a translator understand proofreading (editing) marks, which follow national standards and are marked both in text and in margin. The most important of them are as follows:
|