Theory of translation
 Скачать 397.98 Kb.
|
PART III. GRAMMAR PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATIONChapter 1. FORMAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SOURCE TEXT AND TARGET TEXTSource language and target language texts differ formally due to a number of reasons of both objective and subjective character. Objective reasons are caused by the divergence in the language systems and speech models. Subjective reasons can be attributed to the speaker’s choice of a language form. Thus, systemic dissimilarity of forms takes place when one of the languages lacks some grammar category and, therefore, has no corresponding form. For example, English possesses the morphological categories of the article or the gerund lacking in the Russian language; whereas in Russian there is a category of adverbial participle (деепричастие) missing in the English language. To translate these forms, one has to compensate them or restructure the sentence. Unique categories in one of the languages can occur at the syntactic level as well. For example, English absolute constructions, complex object and complex subject (with the infinitive and participle), are alien to the Russian language. Therefore, they require special attention from students of English. On the other hand, there are linguistic phenomena that exist in both languages but differ in some details, which also causes difficulties in translation. For example, passive voice is found both in English and Russian, but in English it is represented by the indirect and prepositional passive construction (He is given a book. He is asked for.) but the Russian language has only the direct passive construction (Книга дана ему). Objective reasons for formal dissimilarities include differences in word combination norms and models that make up language traditions. For example, in English it is possible to say Table I lists… but in Russian the similar structure is ridiculous (*Таблица 1 перечисляет…). It is much more “Russian” to verbalize the source of information as the adverbial modifier of place: В таблице 1 перечислены… Similar structures in both languages can be used with different frequency in different types of text. Violation of the frequency rate can lead to awkward language usage. For example, an English scientific text utilizes more simple sentences, whereas in Russian one can find an abundance of complex sentences. Thus the objective reasons for formal dissimilarities can be classified into those caused by the language system, by norm and by usage. Subjective reasons for formal alterations in the target text are accounted for by a communicator’s (or translator’s) personal intention, emphasis or preference. These reasons include the communicative structure of the utterance, that is, emphasis on the logically stressed word that can lead to the change of syntactic structure:1 A woman entered the room. – В комнату вошла женщина. They also include pragmatic adaptations of the sentence to the receptor by adding or reducing some information in the utterance (which results in complex rather than grammar transformations): WSU is located in Pullman, WA. – Вашингтонскийуниверситет расположен в городеПулман, штат Вашингтон. Translator’s idiolect, or his/her individual language system distinguishing him/her from another person, is also responsible for the difference in formal alterations: He fell a week before Armistice was declared. – Он пал за неделю до того, как объявили перемирие. The translator chose here a complex sentence instead of a simple one (Он пал за неделю до объявления перемирия), perhaps because this structure was more typical for his idiolect than the second one. Thus, difference in formal structures of the source and target texts can also be accounted for by the communicator’s logical accentuation, as well as by the pragmatic adaptation of the utterance to the receptor and translator’s idiolect. These reasons are of a subjective character, as compared with the first group. Chapter 2. TRANSLATING FINITE VERB FORMS§1. TRANSLATING TENSE AND ASPECT FORMSEvery student of English has been challenged by the difference between English and Russian tense and aspect categories. To begin with, in English there are four major aspect groups (Simple, Progressive, Perfect, Perfect Progressive), showing how the action is performed, multiplied by four time indicators (Present, Past, Future, Future in the Past.) In Russian there are three time indicators, called tenses (Present, Past, Future), and two aspects, perfective and imperfective. Therefore, English and Russian forms are not parallel, though some regularities might be observed between them. English Simple (Indefinite) tenses denoting regular, permanent actions correspond to the Russian imperfective aspect: Water boils at 100º Centigrade. – Вода кипит при 100ºC. When expressing an action as a single fact, a Simple tense corresponds to the Russian perfective form: When I heard the news, I walked faster and faster. – Когда я услышала эту новость я пошла быстрее. Very often the contrast between the meanings expressed by a Simple tense is seen in the microcontext: a single action is indicated by a verb-noun predicate: She gave a cry. – Она вскрикнула. (Cf. She cried hoarsely. – Она хрипло кричала.); by a phrasal verb: She cried something out. – Она что-то выкрикнула.; or by parallel (homogeneous) predicates: He cried something unintelligible and rushed past. – Он крикнул что-то невнятно и пронесся мимо. Progressive tenses, denoting temporary continuous actions, correspond to the Russian imperfective form: He first became interested in drama when he wasworking abroad. – Он впервые заинтересовался драматургией, когда работал за границей. The same holds true in reference to permanent actions expressed in emotional speech: You are always coming late! – Вечно ты опаздываешь! But when expressing a future action, especially a ‘matter-of-fact’ future, the English Progressive corresponds to the Russian perfective: Spring is coming. Birds will beflying back soon. – Идет весна. Вскоре прилетят птицы. English Perfect forms, when expressing a completed action, correspond to Russian perfective verbs: I haven’t finished yet. – Я еще не закончила. By the time we got there the rain had stopped. – К тому времени, как мы добрались туда, дождь уже прекратился. To render the meaning of completion expressed by the Perfect verb, a translator has to use the technique of compensation and extension by introducing adverbs implying completion: уже, еще, etc. Therefore, there is no need, when translating from Russian into English the sentence Я уже прочел эту книгу, to use the adverb already. I have read the book is enough to express the completed action. When a Perfect tense expresses a multiple action that took place in the past and can happen in the future, the English verb corresponds to the Russian imperfective form: I’ve met Ann’s husband. – Я встречала мужа Энн. I have eaten at that restaurant many times. – Я ел в этом ресторане много раз. It is not infrequent that Perfect tenses require lexical compensation in translation: Russian literature has possessed the feeling of the sole. – Русская литература всегда характеризовалась чувством одиночества. I have lived here for two years. – Я прожил здесь два года и до сих пор живу. He had been a captain. – Когда-то он был капитаном. Perfect Progressive tense forms denote an action begun before another action and continued into it; they correspond to the Russian imperfective forms: He has been studying Japanese for three years. – Он изучает японский язык уже три года. There is also asymmetry in expressing tense distinctions in English and Russian. Russian future tenses correspond to English present tense forms in adverbial clauses: Если он придет, я дам вам знать. – If he comes, I’ll let you know. When the English present tense is used to denote the near future, in Russian the present tense form alternates with the future: We are going downtown in some minutes. – Мы пойдем/идем в город через несколько минут. The train arrives in five minutes. – Поезд прибудет через пять минут. The English Present Perfect or Present Perfect Continuous verb is usually translated by the Russian past tense verb, since it indicates a ‘prepresent’ action: Who has eaten my soup? – Кто съел мой суп? Who has been eating my soup? – Кто ел мой суп? What are the possible traps for the translator beside this asymmetry? Care should be taken with the connotation of the tense forms: in emotional speech the English Progressive and Simple tenses seem to exchange their aspect characteristics: the Progressive form indicates an exaggerated permanent action and the Simple verb denotes an action taking place at the moment of speech, the speaker’s emphasis being placed on the circumstances rather than the action itself. In this case the corresponding degree of expressiveness in Russian can be reached by lexical compensation: She is always complaining! – Вечно она жалуется! Why don’t you write? – Ну, почему ты не пишешь? Lexical compensation is often a way out in contrasting tense and aspect forms: «Почему ты не знаешь правила?» – «Я учил.» – «Учил, да не выучил.» “Why don’t you know the rule?” – “I learnt it.” - “You tried to, but failed.” I sobbed a little still, but that was because I had been crying, not because I wascrying then. – Я еще всхлипывала, но это потому, что я плакала перед этим, а не потому, что я ревела в этот момент. Inexperienced students of translation, though they have studied the rule of Sequence of Tenses in their grammar class, are sometimes not aware that this rule does not exist in Russian. Therefore, when translating from Russian into English, they are likely to do word-for-word translation (or rather “tense-for-tense” translation), which is not correct in Russian: I knew he was in the village. – Я знал, что он в деревне (rather than Я знал, что он был в деревне.) The latter Russian sentence corresponds to the English I knew he had been in the village. §2. TRANSLATING PASSIVE VOICE FORMSEnglish and Russian passive forms are different both in type of form constructions and in frequency. English passive voice is used more frequently due to the various types of construction it occurs in. Whereas Russian passive voice construction is formed only by transitive verbs requiring a direct object when used as an active voice structure, English passive is classified into four types of construction:
Thus, only one type of English passive construction has a direct correspondence in Russian. But not all English direct passive constructions can be transformed into Russian passive, since the verb transitivity in English and Russian does not coincide. Cf. to enter the room – войти в комнату, to join the party – вступить в партию, to follow somebody – следовать за кем-то, to attend the meeting – присутствовать на собрании, to influence somebody – влиять на кого-то: The next morning this event was reported by all the papers. – На следующее утро об этом событии сообщили все газеты. Care should be taken when translating English parallel passive verbs, since they may correspond in Russian to the verbs of different cases: He was trusted and respected. – Ему доверяли и его уважали. In this case the Russian sentence requires repetition of the pronominal object (ему – его); otherwise, the sentence would sound grammatically incorrect (*Ему доверяли и уважали). As for passive forms, there are two types in English: be-passive and getpassive. The latter is mostly used to indicate the starting point of the action: They got married. – Они поженились. The get-passive is also used to express negative connotation, when the object of the action undergoes something unpleasant or dangerous:124 He got hurt. – Он ушибся. (Он обиделся.) He got injured in a road accident. – Он получил травму во время дорожной аварии. In Russian there are also two passive verb forms. They derive from the parallel synthetic and analytical forms: строился – был построен. The difference between the forms is either semantic or stylistic. As for their meanings, the analytical form denotes a state, whereas the synthetic form expresses a process: Дом был построен этой бригадой. – Дом строился этой бригадой. In English this difference is rendered by the Simple and the Progressive forms, respectively: The house was built by this team. – The house was being built by this team. When no agent of the action is mentioned, the Russian synthetic verb form can be substituted in English by the prepositional noun predicative: Мост строится с прошлого года. – The bridge has been under construction since last year. Or the difference between the forms can be stylistic: while the analytical form is used in literary or academic works, the synthetic form in colloquial speech can also denote a fact, not a process, thus corresponding to the English The house was built by this team. As for the synonymy of the indefinite personal active and passive forms in Russian, the difference lies in style: the passive form is more formal: George was invited to spend the month of August in Crome. – Cf. 1) Джордж был приглашен провести август в Кроуме. 2) Джорджа пригласили провести август в Кроуме. One challenge of translating is the English “double passive”. It takes place when the main predicate is used in the passive voice and the following infinitive is also passive: The treaty is reportedto have been signed by both parties. In translation, the predicate can be substituted by the active verb: Сообщают, что договор уже подписан обеими сторонами. The principal clause can also be substituted by a parenthetical one: Как сообщают, договор уже подписан обеими сторонами. Or the passive infinitive can be substituted for the active one, so that the sentence subject turns into the sentence object: The prisoners were ordered to be shot. – Было приказано расстрелять пленников. Finally, there might be a substitution by the noun: The music is intended to be played on the piano. – Музыка предназначена для игры на фортепьяно. §3. TRANSLATING THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD FORMSIn both English and Russian the Subjunctive Mood expresses a hypothetical, unreal action. In Russian, there is only one form: the past form of the verb + the particle бы: Я хотел бы пойти туда. (In informal speech, though, the verb can be omitted, with only the particle expressing the hypothetical action: Чайку бы! Sometimes the Russian subjunctive form can be reduced to the conjunction чтобы only.) In English, unlike Russian, there are many verb forms to express the subjunctive mood: synthetic forms be/do, were/did; analytical forms should/would, do/have done, might/could do/have done, may/can do, had done, which is a challenge for a fledgling translator. Usage of the English subjunctive forms depends on the clause structure and semantics of the main verb. Thus, adverbial clauses of condition presuppose the usage of the were/ did or had done forms: Если бы я только знала… - If only I knew (had known), nominative (object, subject, attributive, predicative, that is, nominal part of the predicate) clauses predetermine the usage of (should) do forms: Предлагаю, чтобы он это сделал. – I suggest that he (should) do it. On the other hand, clauses of the same syntactic function vary depending on the meaning of the main verb. For example, in object clauses that depend on the verb wish, the were/did form can be used (I wish it were summer), as well as had done forms (I wish he had not discussed it with you yesterday.) In clauses depending on information verbs and expressing proposition the (should) do form is used (In the year 325 A.D. it was decreed that Easter fall on the first Sunday after the full moon following the first day of spring.). If a clause depends on the verb denoting anxiety, the can (could) / may (might) forms are used: I am afraid that he could forget it. The Russian subjunctive mood form does not indicate time relations, there being only one verb form. In English a speaker shows time distinctions by the verb forms: If I had known it yesterday and if I knew it now… I wish I could help you (now). I wish I could have helped you in that accident. To render in Russian the meaning of the English sentence one has to compensate the English verb form by some modifier indicating time: If she were in New York, she would certainly call you. – Если бы она сейчас была в Нью-Йорке, она бы, конечно, позвонила вам. If you had followed your father’s advice and gone into the army, you would probably be a colonel by now. – Если бы ты тогда послушал совета своего отца и пошел бы в армию, сейчас ты, возможно, был бы уже полковником. If the meaning of time is clear from the context, a zero transformation is employed in Russian: The demonstration would have passed off quite peacefully, had the organizers taken a few elementary precautions. – Если бы организаторы предусмотрели элементарные меры безопасности, демонстрация прошла бы вполне мирно. To render some structures, the “problematic condition” in particular, it is necessary to substitute the subjunctive mood by the future tense form of the indicative mood, compensating lexically the specific construction meaning: Should I not be promoted, I'm going to have to go out and look for a better-paying job. – Если все жеменя не повысят в должности, я буду вынужден уехать в поисках лучше оплачиваемой работы. Constructions with the ‘wish’-clauses often require antonymous translation: I wish she were here. – Жаль, что ее здесь нет. I wish you had not said it to him. – Жаль, что ты ему это сказал. It is not infrequent that English and Russian sentences differ in degree of certainty or uncertainty expressed by the mood construction. An English sentence shows more vividly the speaker’s attitude to the situation, whether s/he considers the situation real or unreal. Cf. It looks as if he were sick. (I am not sure). – It looks as if he is sick. (He really is but I wouldn’t like to sound categorical.) In Russian this subtle difference in meaning is lost: Кажется, он болен. |