24.10.

24
PhI 23-7k3
PhI 23-7r

Lecture11-12. Evaluative classification of translation. Pragmatic of

Translation

Plan:
1. Conception of the pragmatics of translation
2. The principles and methods of pragmatic adaptation of the translation
3. Factors influencing on the quality of translation.

1. Conception of the pragmatics of translation

Words in language are related to certain referents which they designate and
to other words of the same language with which they make up syntactic units.
These relationships are called semantic and syntactic, respectively. Words are also
related to the people who use them. To the users of the language its words are not
just indifferent, unemotional labels of objects or ideas. The people develop a
certain attitude to the words they use. Some of the words acquire definite
implications, they evoke a positive or negative response, they are associated with
certain theories, beliefs, likes or dislikes. There are «noble» words like «honor,
dignity, freedom», etc., and «low» words like «infamy, cowardice, betrayal».
Words can be «nice» or «ugly, attractive or repulsive». Such relationships
between the word and its users are called «pragmatic».
The pragmatic implications of a word are an important part of its
meaning that produces a certain effect upon the Receptor. Of even greater
significance is the pragmatic aspect of speech units. Every act of speech
communication is meant for a certain Receptor, it is aimed at producing a certain
effect upon him. In this respect any communication is an exercise in pragmatics.
Since the pragmatic effect plays such an important part in
communication, its preservation in translation is the primary concern of the
translator, though it is by no means an easy task. The pragmatic aspect of
translation involves a number of difficult problems.
 To begin with, the pragmatics of the original text cannot be as a rule directly
reproduced in translation but often require important changes in the transmitted
message. Correlated words in different languages may produce dissimilar effect
upon the users. An «ambition» in English is just the name of a quality which may
evoke any kind of response — positive, negative or neutral. Its Kazakh/Russian
counterpart «амбиция» is definitely not a nice word. Thus, the phrase «The voters
put an end to the general's political ambitions» can be translated as
«Сайлаушылар генералдың саяси амбициясын тоқтатты» /«Избиратели
положили конец политическим амбициям генерала», retaining the negative
implication of the original, but if the implication were positive the translator would
not make use of the derogatory term. The sentence «The boy's ambition was to
become a pilot» will be translated as «Баланың арманы ұшқыш болу
болды» /«Мечтой мальчика было стать летчиком».
Such words as «idealism» or «nationalism» often have a positive effect in the
English text and are rendered into Kazakh/Russian as «идеалдарға қызмет ету»,
«риясыздық»/«служение идеалам, бескорыстие» and «ұлттық өзін-өзі тану,
ұлттық мүдделер» / «национальное самосознание, национальные интересы»,
respectively.
When we consider not just separate words but a phrase or number of
phrases in a text, the problem becomes more complicated. The communicative
effect of a speech unit does not depend on the meaning of its components
alone, but involves considerations of the situational context and the previous
experience. A report that «John has run a hundred metres in 9 seconds» will pass
unnoticed by some people and create a sensation with others who happen to know
that it is a wonderful record-breaking achievement.

2.The principles and methods of pragmatic adaptation of the translation

Here again, a great role is played by differences in the historical and

cultural backgrounds of different language communities, in their customs and
living conditions. It stands to reason that the natives of a tropical island can hardly
be impressed by the statement that something is «as white as snow». The reported
«cooling» in the relations between two friends may be understood as a welcome
development by the people who live in a very hot climate.
It seems imperative, therefore, that translation should involve a kind of
pragmatic adaptation to provide for the preservation of the original communicative
effect. This adaptation must ensure that the text of translation conveys the same
attitude to the reported facts as does the original text. It goes without saying that in
an adequate translation the comical should not be replaced by the tragical or a
praise turned into a censure.
The pragmatic adaptation of the translation must also see to it that Receptor
understands the implications of the message and is aware of its figurative or
situational meaning. A phrase like «Smith made another touchdown in three
minutes» refers to a situation which does not mean anything to a Kazakh/Russian
Receptor who does not know anything about the rules of American football. When
the English original just refers to the First Amendment, the Kazakh/Russian
translation should make it more explicit by speaking about the First Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution; otherwise Receptor will not understand what it is all about.
It is obvious that there can be no equivalence if the original text is clear and
unequivocal while its translation is obscure and hard to understand.
Discussing the problem of equivalence at different levels, we have emphasized
the necessity of making the translation as understandable and intelligible as the
original text is. We have also taken care to include in the overall meaning of the
text all its emotional, figurative and associative implications. The pragmatic
adaptation of this kind is an integral part of translation procedures which ensure the
necessary level of equivalence.
The pragmatics of the text, which are linguistically relevant and depend on
the relationships between the linguistic signs and language users, are part of the
contents of the text. It is a meaningful element whose preservation in translation is
desirable at any level of equivalence. It is reproduced in translation if Receptor
gets the whole information about the pragmatic aspects of the original text and the
pragmatics of the original text are just as accessible and understandable to him as
they are to SR. This does not imply that he will be actually influenced by this
information or react to it in the same way.
Apart from the pragmatics of linguistic signs, there are also the pragmatics of
individual speech acts. In a concrete act of speech, the Source has to do with the
specific Receptor upon whom he tries to produce the desired effect, and from
whom he would like to elicit the desired reaction.
This second type of pragmatics is also present in translation events. A
translation event is a kind of speech act and it is performed with a certain
pragmatic purpose as well. But here we are confronted with a more complicated
process than in ordinary speech.
A translation event is pragmatically oriented in two directions. On the one
hand, it is translation which means that its primary purpose is to give the closest
possible approximation to the original text. This orientation towards a foreign text
is one aspect of its pragmatics.
 But on the other hand, a translation event is a concrete speech act in the
target language. Therefore, it is not just an act of interlingual communication
between the Source Receptor and Target Receptor, but also an act of speech
communication between the Translator and Target Receptor. This involves
two important implications. First, a translation event may be pragmatically
oriented toward a concrete TR, and, second, it is the result of the activities of a
concrete translator, who may have some additional pragmatic motivation, may
pursue some aims beside and beyond the true reproduction of the original text.
As long as translation is not just an exercise in producing an equivalent
text in another language but a pragmatic act under specific circumstances, its
results can be assessed both in terms of its loyalty to the original and its ability to
achieve the purpose for which it has been undertaken. This necessitates the
introduction of the concept of the «pragmatic value» in translation, which assesses
its success in achieving this pragmatic super-purpose.
As has been pointed out, the additional pragmatic goal of the translation
event may depend either on the particular type of TR or on the translator's designs
beyond his call of duty as a no-nonsense transmitter of the original message.
The users of the translation often make judgements of its quality exclusively
on its merits as an instrument in achieving some specific aim. If in doing it, the
translation departs from the original text, so much the worse for the latter.

3.Factors influencing on the quality of translation.

In this way the pragmatics of translation acquire a new dimension. E. Nida

introduced the concept of «dynamic equivalence» which should be judged not
against the original but against the Receptor's reactions. With dynamic
equivalence, texts are rendered into the target language using words and structures
that make more sense to their audience than a word for word translation. The
vocabulary, grammar structure and idioms of the source text will not be preserved.
The aim is to maintain the intended meaning and elicit the intended emotional
response by utilizing grammar and vocabulary that feels more natural in the target
language.
For many practical purposes the process of translation is predominantly
oriented towards TR. So, translation of the maintenance instructions is considered
good if, after reading it, a technician will be able to operate the appropriate piece of
machinery correctly.
Sometimes books written for adults are translated for children's reading with
appropriate alterations made in the course of translation. Presumably any text
should be differently translated depending on whether it is for experts or laymen,
for staging or screening, and so on.
As to the specific aims pursued by the translator, they may also bring about
considerable changes in the resulting text with no direct bearing on the original.
Each translation is made in a certain pragmatic or social context, and its results are
used for a number of purposes. The translator is assigned his task and paid for it by
the people for whom his work is not an end in itself but an instrument for
achieving some other ends. Aware of this, the translator tries to make his work
meet these «extra-translational» requirements, introducing appropriate changes in
the text of translation. Sometimes these changes are prompted by the desire to
produce a certain effect on the Receptors, which has already been mentioned.
The specific goal, which makes the translator modify the resulting text,
often means that, for all practical purposes, he assumes an additional role and is no
longer just a translator. He may set himself some propaganda or educational task,
he may be particularly interested in some part of the original and wants to make a
special emphasis on it, he may try to impart to the Receptor his own feelings about
the Source or the event described in the original. In pursuance of his plans the
translator may try to simplify, abridge or modify the original message, deliberately
reducing the degree of equivalence in his translation.
It is clear that such cases go far beyond the inherent aspects of translation and
it is not the task of the translation theory to analyze or pass a judgement on them.
But the translator should be aware of this possibility for it will have an impact on
his strategy.
In many types of translation any attempt by the translator to modify his text
for some extra-translational purpose will be considered unprofessional conduct and
severely condemned. But there are also some other types of translation where
particular aspects of equivalence are of little interest and often disregarded.
When a book is translated with a view to subsequent publication in another
country, it may be adapted or abridged to meet the country's standards for printed
matter. The translator may omit parts of the book or some descriptions considered
too obscene or naturalistic for publication in his country, though permissible in the
original.
In technical or other informative translations (Informative translation is
the translation of texts, the main purpose of which is to convey information to the
reader, and not emotional or aesthetic impact), the translator or his employers may
be interested in getting the gist of the contents or the most important or novel part
of it, which may involve leaving out certain details or a combination of translation
with brief accounts of less important parts of the original. A most common feature
of such translations is neglect of the stylistic and structural peculiarities of the
original. In this case translation often borders on retelling or précis writing.
A specific instance is consecutive interpretation (Consecutive interpreters
listen to what the speaker is saying, and convey the message into another language
after the speaker has paused. Typically, the speaker will pause after each complete
thought to give the interpreter time to deliver the message.), where the interpreter
is often set a time limit within which he is expected to report his translation no
matter how long the original speech may have been. This implies selection,
generalizations, and cutting through repetitions, incidental digressions, occasional
slips or excessive embellishments.
It is obvious that in all similar cases the differences which can be
revealed between the original text and its translation should not be ascribed to
the translator's inefficiency or detract from the quality of his work. The
pragmatic value of such translations clearly compensates for their lack of
equivalence. Evidently there are different types of translation serving different
purposes.
Control questions:

1. What is pragmatics? What is the difference between semantics, syntax and

pragmatics? What relationships can exist between the word and its users?
2. What role do the pragmatic aspects play in translation? Can correlated words in
SL and TL have dissimilar effect upon the users? How should the pragmatic
meaning of the word be rendered in translation?
3. What does the communicative effect of a speech unit depend upon? What
factors influence the understanding of TT? What is background information?
4. What are the relationships between pragmatics and equivalence? Can
semantically equivalent speech units in ST and TT produce different effects upon
their readers?
5. How is the translation event oriented pragmatically? Is its only purpose to
produce the closest approximation to ST? What additional pragmatic factors may
have their impact on the specific translation event?
6. How is the translating process oriented toward a concrete TR? What does
«dynamic equivalence» mean? What is the pragmatic value of translation?
7. What additional goals may the translator pursue in the translating process? In
what way can such a «super-purpose» influence the process? Can the translator
play some «extra-translational» roles in his work?
8. What is the pragmatic adaptation of TT? What are the main factors necessitating
such adaptation? What changes may be introduced in the translating process due to
the pragmatic requirements?