The advantages of the equivalence level model
-avoids the one-sidedness of the denotative and the transformational models, and successfully reflects the complexity of the work of the translator, who does not follow only one strategy
-In reality, elements with an equivalent on the level of linguistic signs are translated on the level of linguistic signs, and the step onto the “higher” levels as defined by Komissarov occurs only when no direct equivalences are found. (This, of course, will happen very soon, because even the simplest possessive or passive structure in an English sentence requires the translator to step to the next level in translating it into Hungarian.)
6) Types of translation (J. Driden).
The first classification of types of translation was given an John Drydon. He created the first classification of types of translation.
Metaphrase- the type of translation which renders exactly every single word of the original, tries to preserve the structure of the original, disregarding the laws and cultural peculiarities of the target language and culture. Metaphase is close to the term word-for-word translation, but there is no direct correspondence. Word-for-word is most precise and sometimes distorts the target language.
Word-for-word is just the process of translating every single word of the text but the language is not distorted. It prevails the laws of the source language. (e.g John has 3 daughters.) If we translate it as metaphase we can say- (Джон имеет 3 дочерей). It is not a good language. It is not idiomatic Russian. But the language is not distorted. Because there are structures in Russian which sound this way (I have the order to tell you- я имею честь вам сказать).. But in the case of ‘John has 3 daughters’ this does not work. Because it is idiomatic.
And “I have done this exercise” if translate it not like it should be translate in this case (Я имею это упражнение сделанным). The meaning is quiet clear. But the structure of the Russian language distorted. Metaphrase translation is very much used by translators when they translate technical and scientific texts meant for specialists. Because they do not off idiomatic language they need only precision. That is why metaphrase is very good for this purpose. As for word-for-word translation, often use teachers to explain to their students the structure of the English language.
Paraphrase seeks to overcome the irrationalities of the source language, but only in a mechanical way. We retain the value of the original phrase by means of limiting or expanding definitions. A paraphraser deals with elements both languages as if they were math symbols. So if you find a motion you can not translate, you expand it by explaining it.
Unlike metaphrare imitation submits to the irrationally of languages. It presupposes that practically no phrase, sentence, word of art can be produced in and the language. No individual part of the text can correspond to the individual parts of the target language text. And there remains nothing else to translator but to prepare an imitation: this is a whole that is composed of part noticeable different of the original ones. And yet this whole preserves the imagery the spirit and the notional coloring of the original. But it never distorts the language of the target culture.
There are 2 translations-the first one is done by Zahader and the second one is done by Dimurova. The approachs to translation are different. Zahader read the original and restructure the book. Some parts he put to the first place, some parts he changed. But he did it so scarefully that the book preserve the same meaning and imagery for Russian children. But Dimurova preserved the structure of the original. She tried to distort the language and it made the book boring.
Adaption- a case of translation used to bring the text very close to the target language culture. He does not case about cultural and languages peculiarities of the source culture and gives the reader another version of the text from the perspective of the target language culture()
retelling- used when translating prose and poetry. You retell the content of the text. You say what it is all about. You never thing of preserving the structure or the wording. Content is the main value.
It is the most kind of translation. It does not have any artistic value. It is not based on imagery. So,sometimes it is necessary when you do not inn very much the culture, and you can not find the referent. There are no reference material.
Interpretation- not only some explanation provided by the translator for the want of a linguistic or cultural equivalents but also the translator ideas about what he/she is translating, his attitudes to it which may be given in the footnotes or right in the text, and may be structured as a sentences or paraphrase or may be shown in the choice of words. in this case the translator enhances the connotation implied by the original. E.G. The translator of Dickens’s little Dorit. "she bursted into tears" the meaning is quite clear, the words are quite natural. But the translation was
Dickens was very much compotinent it but he was not sentimental. This is what interpretation is. It is used very often because the translators want to show that they are too clever.
Дата добавления: 2016-07-27; просмотров: 2866;