Translation

1. Instructor
Muhammad Ahmad

2. What is Translation?
Introduction:
 To give an exact definition or meaning of word
“ Translation” is not easy task. Translation like
poetry has become elusive.
 Translation is a myth.
 It is both a substitution and a transfer of meaning
from one language ( source language) to another
language (target language).
 A process of translation from SL to TL.
 In the light of recent literary criticism which denies
the author, undermines the text, highlights the
reader and emphasizes the polysemy of
interpretation and pleaded for the indeterminacy of
meaning, the art of translation has become

3. What is Translation?
• Translation, according to,
• Dr Johnson
“Change into another language, retaining the
sense”.
• A.H.Smith (1988: 8) for modifies previous
statement,
“To translate is to change into another language
retaining as much of the sense as one can.”

4. • Catford (1985: 20) defines it from
linguistic point of view,
“The replacement of textual material in
one language (SL) by equivalent
material in another language.”
• Theodore Savory (1957) defines it as
an “Art”
• Horst Frenz (1961: 72-96 ) opines
“Translation is neither a creative art
nor an imitative art, but stands
somewhere between the two.”

5. • Eugene Nida
“Translation is basically not a process of matching
surface forms by rules of correspondence, but
rather a more complex procedure involving
analysis, transfer and restructuring .”
• Dotest
“The transference of meaning from one set of
patterned symbol into another set of patterned
symbol.”
According to “ Benedetto Croce” famous dictum,
“Traddutore-traitor”
“Translator is a traitor, a falsifier of the original.”
“ Translation is like a woman if beautiful, it cannot be
faithful.”

6. • Wilss (1982:134) defines translation as
“A transfer process which aims at the
transformation of a written SL (Source
Language) text into an optimally equivalent
TL (Target Language) text, and which
requires the syntactic, the semantic and the
pragmatic understanding and analytical
processing of the SL text".

7. • Hatim and Mason (2001:8) define it as
“The transfer of meaning from one
language to another".
• Hartmann and Stork(1972:242)
focus on translation as a product when
defining translation as “The
replacement of a representation of a
text in one language by a
representation of an equivalent text in
a second language".

8. • According to Nida and Taber
(1989:12), "translating consists in
reproducing in the receptor language
the closest natural equivalent of the
source language message, first in
terms of meaning and secondly in
terms of style”.

9. It is an act of adjustment and a compromising
exercise.
 Translation is an operation performed on language
process of substituting a text in one language for a
text in another. Clearly, any theory of translation
must draw upon a theory of language- a general
linguistic theory.
 Translation Studies is a new academic discipline
related to theory and phenomena of translation.
 By nature, it is multidisciplinary
 Language
 Communication Studies
 Philosophy
 Cultural Studies

10. Points to remember
• Change from SL to TL retaining sense
by using TL equivalents.
• Translation is a bridge between
creative and imitative art.
• Complex procedure involving
analysis, transfer and restructuring.
• Transference of meaning and
structure.

11. 1. According to Traditional Theorists
Translation
LITERARY NON-LITERARY
Sense
+
Style
Sense
Kinds of Translation

12. Literary:
• Mataphorical/ Rhetorical
According to G.E Wellworth, literary
translation requires
1.The recreation of a situation or
cohesive semantic block in the new
language with its cultural setting.
2.The translator decodes the motive of
the SL text and encodes it in the TL
text.
3.The mode of displacement continues.

13. Non-literary:
• In the realms of Physical Science,
Social Science, Journalism, Law etc.
• Concerns with ‘Meaning’ not Style.
e.g. translating political, scientific
economic theories from SL to TL
• Contents get precedence over Form

14. 2. Catford divides non-literary
translation into three basic types
NON-LITERARY
TRANSLATION
Context Level Rank
Full/
Total Linguistic Items
Partial/
Restricted
Unbound/
Free
Bound

15. Context
• Full/ Total: Every part of the SL text is
replaced by the TL text material. It is a
myth. The translator becomes the de-
coder of it.
• Partial: Some parts of the SL text are
left untranslated.
• Restricted: The replacement of SL
textual material at only one level. It is
hardly any translation.

16. Level
• Phonological: SL phonology is
replaced by equivalent TL phonology.
The grammar and lexis of SL text
remain same except some random
grammatical and lexical deviation.
• Graphological: SL graphology is
replaced by equivalent of TL
graphology. The equivalence is based
on the relationship to the same graphic
substance.

17. • Grammatical: Replacement of SL
grammar by equivalent of TL grammar
but the lexis is not replaced. The
equivalent is based on the relationship
to the same contextual substance.
• Lexical: Replacement of SL lexis by
equivalent TL lexis but the grammar is
not changed.

18. Rank
• Bounded: Selection of TL equivalent
is deliberately confined to one rank or
few ranks (levels). Word for word
translation.
• Un-bounded/ Free: Equivalent shift
freely up and down the rank scale.

19. Translation
METAPHRASE PARAPHRASE IMITATION
3. John Dryden divides translation
into three basic types
Word For Word Sense For Sense Free

20. • Metaphrase: Turning an author word
by word and line by line, from one
language into another.
• Paraphrase: Translation with latitude,
the Ciceronian ‘sense for sense’ view
of translation.
• Imitation: Where the translator can
abandon the text of the original as he
sees fit.

21. 4. Roman Jakobson divides translation
into three types
Translation
INTRALINGUAL
INTERLINGUAL/
TRANSLATION
PROPER
INTERSEMIOTIC/
TRANSMUTATION

22. • Intralingual: Interpretation of verbal
signs by means of other signs in the
same system. e.g. synonyms
Commotion, noise
Bachelor, celibate
• Interlingual: interpretation of verbal
signs by means of verbal signs in
other linguistic system. e.g.
Wazu, ablution

23. • Intersemiotic: interpretation of verbal
signs by means of signs of non-verbal
sign system. e.g. traffic signals,
nodding, shaking of head etc.
Jakobson’s approach makes it clear
that no translation however accurate it
may provide the exact equivalence of
the messages of the SL text.

24. 5. According to Mc-Guire
Translation
VERTICAL Horizontal

25. • Vertical: Translation into the native
language from the SL which has a
special value.
• Horizontal: Translation, when both
SL and TL have the same value. It
includes imitation and borrowing.

26. References
• A. H. Smith, ed., Aspects of Translation
(London: Seeker and Warburg, 1988)8.
• J. C. Catford, A Linguistic Theory of
Translation ( London: OUP, 1985)20.
• Theodore Savory, The Art of Translation
(London: Cape, 1957).
• Horst Frenz, “The Art of Translation” in
N.P. Stallknecht and H.Frenz (eds)
Comparative Literature: Method and
Perspective (Carbondale: South Illinois
University Press, 1961)72-96.

27. • Eugene Nida, Towards a Science
Science of Translating (Leiden: E.J.Brill,
1964).
• G.E. Wellworth, “Special considerations
in Drama Translation,” Translation
Spectrum: Essays in Theory and
Practice, ed. M.G. Rose (New York:
1981)143.
• Bassnett-McGuire, (1991) 71.
• Roman Jacobson, “ A Linguistic Aspects
of Translation,” On Translation ed. R.A.
Brower (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1966) 233.