If we look at the following sentence written in its source language, English；He calls at every house in the street once a month. Look at the syntax;
He calls at every house in the street once a month.
Subject + Verb + object + adverbial of time
If we were to follow the lexical structure of the source language and translate it into Chinese it would look like this;
他 + 光厕 + 这条街上的每户人家 + 每个月一次
Now as a translator in according to Menacere (2008) in his lecture slides says that translation involves expertise and know-how, translating requires excellent competence in terms of: linguistic competence, lexis, grammar and Phonology. Therefore a translator of this sentence should be aware the syntax in Chinese is different to that of English. The Chinese sentence structure is as follows;
他 每月 对这条街上的每户家人 光厕 一次
Subject + Adverbial of time + Object + Verb + frequency
Knowing the rules of a language means being able to understand the difference between, the light work, and the light works. Knowing the light in the first sentence is a noun and in the other it’s an adjective. Similarly when translating into Chinese one must know the correct particle to use. For example the light work, were the adjective describes the noun in Chinese we would have to have the understanding of when to use 的，得 或 地。
Simply adding an s in the English language at the end of a word indicates it’s plural and can change the whole meaning of the sentence. Luckily the mistake of adding or taking away an s would not exist in Chinese as it is recorded in characters or ideographs. Unlike a phonetic script, ideographs are not affected by phonological evolution and are therefore largely immune to change (Hung 2001)
The importance of having linguist competence of another language is vital but this alone will not make a good translator. Communicative competence is needed to contextualize the way in which something is said, because what somebody says it not quite what they mean. For example I could murder a cigarette right now does by no means mean to end the life of a cigarette by brute force! So a person with linguistic competence but no communicative competence would translate into Chinese something like this 我很有可能把一个香烟某杀下来。 This proves the point there is no translation without comprehension.
Sociolinguistic and pragmatic competence according to Fawcett (1997) in his book ‘Translation and Language’ is the study of language in relation to such things as class, age, regional origin and status. Sociolinguistics takes the translator beyond the realms of language and into real word knowledge. As in the above sentence we see that without sociolinguistics translation would lose its meaning. Egyptian born theorist Mona Baker (1992) goes as far as to say that sociolinguistics is not that helpful. Translation is thought to be a process of conveying the same information expressed in the source language into the target language. However 面子 does not exist in another language. It refers to integrity held by yourself, your image of integrity and it can be lost by someone embarrassing you. A literal translation in English would be ‘face’ but to lose face in English would be meaningless. This situation is repeated in Arabic, a language built on its belief of the Islamic religion. The word Ma shallah translated into English would be something along the lines of, give thanks to god. But of course in Arabic the sheer number of times it said in one day indicates it means a lot more. Therefore arguably language can be used more appropriately with the knowledge of sociolinguistics. One would be foolish to believe that the only function language fulfils is communication. Drama, poetry and semantics are powerful enough to evoke feeling. Language can be used to address someone with respect. For instance 您 in Chinese and Vous in French.
Phonetics is the study of sound. In translation we mostly do not have to worry about this level of language. However according to Fawcett(1997) ‘in literary texts a lot of the time and in many other types of text some of the time, there are special sounds effects such as alliteration and assonance that can combine to special effect.
In Chinese the tongue twister 吃葡萄不吐葡萄皮would not prove phonetically challenging if in English ‘when you eat grapes don’t spit the grape skin out.’
Intonation is another aspect in translation, knowing when to stress and when not to stress. This, in the translation of English into Chinese, may prove problematic as Chinese is a tonal language. The effect of not getting the stress right ranges from being misunderstood, to being understood but sounding odd. (Menacere 2008)
Because Chinese being the tonal language it is can cause huge problems if we stress on the wrong word. For examples your mother is beautiful 你的妈很漂亮said in the wrong intonation can easily be interpreted as your horse is beautiful.你的马很漂亮。 Just as in English dessert and desert, proves understanding of intonation can help a translator in their job.
Another problem found in the translation between languages is fixed expressions or idioms. In Chinese in which the word/sentence orders are determined by traditional usage. Look at this example
Original Chinese version: 繁衍生息
Word for word English rendering: multiply and live
Acceptable English rendering: live and multiply
Ellipsis is where a language has the capability to omit certain words but still have a coherent meaning. In English for example, a noun or verb may be omitted in the text if it is repeated. But in Chinese repetition of the same word in the early and later texts is natural, legitimate and habitual. (Jing ,2006)
3.1.1 Translation theory
One theory of translation is that translation is made up of 3 components: specification of function and goal; description and analysis of operations; and critical comment on relationships between observation and goal (Kelly 1979)
This has similar connotations to a Chinese theory on translation which broke the process down into three components.
达 = To reach a goal, the goal of translation
信 = To stay truthful and be faithful to the translation
雄 = Keep the translation eloquent
One famous and one of the most criticizes theory of translation is one proposed by Vinay and Darbelnet in 1958. They base their theory on two elements: the structuring of language at the level of grammar, lexis and message. And secondly they suggest each language had its own spirit. However translation theorist, Vazquez Ayora, argues that “the translator should not alter this process out of an itch to change things or out of simple fear of criticism of the ignorant” Vazquez Ayora advocates literal translation as a legitimate process. Below is a few examples of gloss translation, and just how this “systematic transfer of language items” Menacere(2008) can go wrong.
To take notice of safe: The slippery are very crafty. (注意安全 坡道路滑) (Beijing) = Be careful, slippery slopes.
It’s always amusing to read when translation where by text goes from one language to another with no changes other than those required by the target language grammar. Theorist alike argue that translation should go beyond the sentence. One method is to look at context and register. Most words we find in the dictionary have multiple meanings. “Only by looking the company a word keeps can we find out which meaning is to be activated in a specific instance ( Fawcett 1997)
Take this example in Chinese to illustrate the importance of context and register. The Chinese word kan看represents see, watch, read and look in English. In Chinese this character can be used interchangeably where as in English it cannot. This could lead to obvious translation errors such as “I am looking a movie” 我在看电影. As opposed to im watching a movie.
However in the study of Psycholinguistics the relevance theory could contradict Fawcett by suggesting context does not mean the co text or the situation. It is rather a set of assumptions that the listener has about the world.
Conclusion.
We have looked at translation with the help of linguistic knowledge. We have looked at translation with the help of communicative knowledge to contextualize. We have seen the importance of sociolinguistics and pragmatics in understanding the source language further. However in the case of the 面子in Chinese and Ma shallah in Arabic we see, however helpful the knowledge of sociolinguistics, translating can often leave a lot unsaid and render powerful expressions in one culture, meaningless in another.
We can conclude that depending on the level of difficulty of the text ie. Poetry being among the highest, the usefulness of phonetics in translating.
We can conclude that counties which are geographically close are easier to translate. English and Chinese are culturally and geographically distant, English is Indo-European and Chinese is Sino-Tibetan. Making the translator go further to gain cultural references.
Translation is not an exact science and therefore has some flaws(Menacere 2008), but I believe what is written in the source language will inevitably only be fully understood by those have a coherent understanding of the source language beyond the boundaries of a classroom. However I will admit that a successful translation, one that is coherent and can evoke the intended response, will endeavour to remain a piece of art in its self. and should be admired in its own right.
I have proven being linguistically equipped is not enough. I believe translation can only try to replicate the original. The only way to fully understand the true meaning of the Source language text, is not to translate it at all but to leave it to be enjoyed by those whom it was intended. Inevitably I still believe ‘Translating is inevitably betraying the original. There is no such a thing as a faithful translation’.
Reference list.
Oxford University Press, (2000) Oxford Pocket Dictionary. Oxford University Press Inc
Oxford University Press, (2000) Oxford Chinese Dictionary. Oxford University Press Inc
Menacere, K. (2008) Lectures Notes School of Languages. LBS Liverpool John Moores University
Hung, E. (2001) Chinese Tradition. Routledge Publishings
Bush, P. (2001) Literary Translation Practices. Routledge Publishings
Fawcett, P. (1997) Translation and Language. St Jerome Publishings
Kelly, L. (1979) The Translation Studies Reader. Routledge
Nida, A.E & Taber, C.R (1974) The Theory and Practice of Translaion. Uinited Bible Societies
Jing, l. (2006) Chinese Learners and English Plural Forms. The Linguistics Journal, vol 1 pg 127
Bibliography
Menacere, K. (1999) Linguistic acrobatics: Translating a web of cultural connections. Babel FIT VOL 45
Cass (1998) Xinhua Zidian New China Character Dictionary
Li, D & Cheng, M .(1988) A Practical Chinese Grammar for Foreigners
Su, S (1990) Active Study Chinese-English Dictionary
Wang,H (1992) Chinese English Dictionary of Function Words' Sinolingua
Picture taken by myself in Beijing.(2007)
