Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies Benjamins Translation Library The Benjamins Translation Library aims t...

Author: Yves Gambier | Miriam Shlesinger | Radegundis Stolze

326 downloads 2352 Views 5MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies

Benjamins Translation Library The Benjamins Translation Library aims to stimulate research and training in translation and interpreting studies. The Library provides a forum for a variety of approaches (which may sometimes be conﬂicting) in a socio-cultural, historical, theoretical, applied and pedagogical context. The Library includes scholarly works, reference works, post-graduate text books and readers in the English language.

EST Subseries The European Society for Translation Studies (EST) Subseries is a publication channel within the Library to optimize EST’s function as a forum for the translation and interpreting research community. It promotes new trends in research, gives more visibility to young scholars’ work, publicizes new research methods, makes available documents from EST, and reissues classical works in translation studies which do not exist in English or which are now out of print.

General editor Yves Gambier

Associate editor Miriam Shlesinger

Honorary editor Gideon Toury

University of Turku

Bar-Ilan University

Tel Aviv University

Rosemary Arrojo

Werner Koller

Sherry Simon

Binghamton University

Bergen University

Concordia University

Michael Cronin

Alet Kruger

Mary Snell-Hornby

Dublin City University

UNISA, South Africa

University of Vienna

Daniel Gile

José Lambert

Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit

Université Lumière Lyon 2

Catholic University of Leuven

University of Joensuu

Ulrich Heid

John Milton

Maria Tymoczko

University of Stuttgart

University of São Paulo

Amparo Hurtado Albir

Franz Pöchhacker

University of Massachusetts Amherst

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

University of Vienna

Lawrence Venuti

Anthony Pym

Temple University

W. John Hutchins

Universitat Rovira i Virgilli

University of East Anglia

Rosa Rabadán

Zuzana Jettmarová

University of León

Advisory board

Charles University of Prague

Volume 72 (Volume 4 in the EST Subseries) Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004 Edited by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger and Radegundis Stolze

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004

Edited by

Yves Gambier University of Turku

Miriam Shlesinger Bar-Ilan University

Radegundis Stolze Darmstadt

John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia

8

TM

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data EST Congress (2004 : Lisbon, Portugal) Doubts and directions in translation studies : selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004 / edited by Yves Gambier, Miriam Shlesinger and Radegundis Stolze. p. cm. (Benjamins Translation Library, issn 0929–7316 ; v. 72) Includes bibliographical references. 1. Translating and interpreting--Congresses. I. Gambier, Yves, 1949II. Shlesinger, Miriam, 1947- III. Stolze, Radegundis. IV. Title. P306.E76 2004 418’.02--dc22 isbn 978 90 272 1680 9 (Hb; alk. paper)

2007005104

© 2007 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microﬁlm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O. Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa

Table of contents Introduction

ix

part 1: T� h eory What is a unique item? Andrew Chesterman Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies Ubaldo Stecconi Translation Studies and Transfer Studies: A plea for widening the scope of Translation Studies Susanne Göpferich Modelling translator’s competence: Relevance and expertise under scrutiny Fabio Alves, José Luiz Gonçalves

3 15

27 41

part 2: Methodology Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal Teresa Seruya, Marta Teixeira Anacleto, Maria dos Anjos Guincho, Dionísio Martínez Soler, Maria Lin Moniz, Alexandra Lopes Establishing an online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies Pamela Grant, Kathy Mezei

59

73

The role of technology in translation management Hanna Risku

85

Establishing rigour in a between-methods investigation of SI expertise Adelina Hild

99



Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies

part 3: Empirical Research Translation revision: A study of the performance of ten professional translators revising a legal text Alexander Künzli Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading Cecilia Alvstad

115 127

The effect of translation on humour response: The case of dubbed comedy in Italy Delia Chiaro

137

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits, and the Third Amendment: What Italians make of cultural references in dubbed texts Rachele Antonini

153

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles Marta Mateo What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? Features of (non-)efficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive Helle V. Dam Traduction, genre et discours scientifique Dolorès Sanchez

169

183 199

part 4: Linguistics-based Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation from English into Finnish Tiina Puurtinen

213

Translating the implicit: On the inferencing and transfer of semantic relations 223 Louise Denver Divisions, description and applications: The interface between DTS, corpus-based research and contrastive analysis* Rosa Rabadán

237

A clivagem no português: Critérios de classificação e métodos de tradução Tinka Reichmann

253

Construals in literary translation: Spatial particles and spatial imagery Hanne Jansen

267

Phraseologie und Übersetzung unter Anwendung von Parallelkorpora Heike van Lawick

281

Table of contents 

The relevance of utterer-centered linguistics to Translation Studies Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

297

part 5: Literature-based De la question de la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote Marc Charron Collusion or authenticity: Problems in translated dialogues in modern women’s travel writing Maureen Mulligan Translators’ agency in 19th-century Finland Outi Paloposki

311

323 335

Le concept de mimésis: Une clé pour la définition des réécritures d’Antonin Artaud Annick Mannekens

347

Name index

357

Subject index

359

Introduction

On September 29–30, 2004, more than two hundred participants assembled in Lisbon, to take a fresh look at current orientations in Translation Studies (TS). In their Call for Papers, the organizers of the Fourth Congress of the European Society for Translation Studies (EST) had acknowledged that “perhaps the time has come to challenge some of the widely held assumptions, biases, and other presuppositions borrowed from other disciplines or based on beliefs and claims that are taken for granted.” Hence, the “Doubts and Directions” in the title of the Congress. Obviously, the contributions (more than 140 papers, 40 posters and six panels) did not all cover the same concerns, the same questions, the same concepts or the same methods. Diversity is a precious asset at a scientific meeting of this kind. About fifty speakers submitted their contributions. Ultimately, thanks to the invaluable help of almost forty referees, we selected twenty-six texts. Our explicit criteria centered on quality of approach; originality of topic, argument and/or analyzed data; and clear composition. The process of grouping the texts was one that we undertook with care and trepidation, leading eventually to the five broad categories presented here. All of the papers in Part One deal with theoretical aspects. While A. Chesterman offers a critical analysis of the so-called unique item hypothesis and raises a number of methodological issues concerning research on the topic, U. Stecconi and S. Göpferich explain how TS can benefit by opening up towards Semiotics, on the one hand, and Transfer Studies, on the other. Both authors justify the expansion they propose, and take issue with the current scope of TS, while posing the fundamental question: What do we mean by translation? In their papers, they deal with concepts such as translation events, equivalence, text transformation and quality assessment. The fourth paper, by F. Alves and J. Gonçalves, endeavors to model translational competence, building on Relevance Theory and Connectionism. All of these aspects – unique item, translation universals, scope of TS, multidisciplinarity, competence, cognitive model – have been on our agenda for some time, and seem to imply a more extensive conceptual and methodological analysis. In Part Two, we have four texts, rather different but all concerned with how to improve our tools of investigation. A Portuguese team, under the leadership of T. Seruya, deals with the cartography of Literary Translation Studies in Portugal: Who are the agents and the architects of this history? What kinds of material do they need? Again, interdisciplinarity and different conceptions of translation make the landscape

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies

even more complex. P. Grant and K. Mezei, concerned over the dissemination of information about Canadian Literary Translation Studies, outline their web-based bibliography and the challenges they are facing, such as organization of keywords, the multilingual character of the references collected, updating the database, etc., as sharing ideas and solutions is a good way to avoid having to reinvent the wheel. H. Risku, aware of the key role played by technologies in our working environments, seeks to determine when, to what extent and with what consequences the available tools can best be used in translating. Efficiency, creativity and quality have been keywords for translators for quite a long time now. The last paper, by A. Hild, highlights four ways of promoting rigour in the experimental study of simultaneous interpreting: triangulation, assessing task representativeness, sampling and data management. Each of the four papers grouped here underlines the importance of a precise and systematic definition of the object of study, adequacy of procedures to be used, contextualisation of the results, and relevant consequences of the research. Part Three, with seven texts, focuses on empirical research. A. Künzli presents the changes introduced by ten professional translators who revised a legal text translated from French into German and an expert’s assessment of the quality of the final output. C. Alvstad suggests that a close reading of translations and their source texts, in a learning context, can enhance university students’ awareness of literary reading as a dynamic process. Both cases shed light on two important but often neglected phases in the overall process of producing translations. The two following papers, by D. Chiaro and R. Antonini, report on how Italian audiences perceive cultural references and verbally expressed humour when watching dubbed programmes. A t-test and an equestionnaire are the two means applied to carry out these perception studies. M. Mateo, also working in the subfield of audiovisual translation but with opera surtitles, describes the marked differences between surtitles in the same language as a function of the translation strategies adopted by certain opera houses. She also examines alternative ways of implementing operational norms and negotiating the constraints imposed both by the transmission channel and by reception factors. H. Dam aims at identifying features of efficiency and inefficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive interpretation. Her hypotheses are tested on the target texts and in notes produced by five interpreters working from Spanish into Danish. Finally, D. Sanchez emphasizes the role played by scientific discourses and their translation in the transmission of dominant gendered representations. The reproduction of ideology is analyzed through a specific example (French-Spanish). The diversity of procedures – including thinkaloud protocol, statistics, use of metatextual information, analysis of macrostructural elements, semantic network analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis – reveal yet again the different sources of methodology in TS. The seven articles in Part Four are linguistically oriented. They give a rich overview of the unfolding relationship between Linguistics and TS. The respective studies deal with ideology through the frequency, functions and effects of the evaluative premodified noun phrases in English and Finnish newspapers (T. Puurtinen); inferenc-

Introduction 

ing and transfer of semantic relations – with explicitations in the target texts from Spanish into Danish (L. Denver); the interface between Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS), corpus-based research and contrastive analysis – illustrated in the “modality-necessity” field, from English into Spanish (R. Rabadán); and the focus-ground structure of texts as expressed by cleft sentences from Portuguese into German (T. Reichmann); by the use of prepositions and locative adverbs to construe spatial relations in Danish and Italian (H. Jansen); by the transfer of anthropomorphic phraseologies in German, Spanish and Catalan, thanks also to DTS, corpus-based studies and cognitive linguistics (H. van Lawick); and by the use of the cognitive approach, as developed by A. Culioli, for a better understanding of language activity and translation (S. Grammenidis and T. Nenopoulou). In one way or another, all seven of these papers process methodological and conceptual problems, making clear that translators use manipulative strategies and complex decision-making, and can always identify problems related to their language pair. Part Five deals mainly with literary works and here too one finds a diversity of themes and procedures. M. Charron wonders about the readability of French (re)translations of Don Quijote. M. Mulligan considers how some British women travellers in the post-colonial period represented the Other in their texts. Their techniques are not without rhetorical and ideological effects on the reader. Searching for a kind of balance between individual agency and collective norms, O. Paloposki studies the extent to which a Finnish translator at the end of the 19th century was able to negotiate the conditions of his work (from the selection of books to be translated and the use of source texts to translation strategies, lay-out design and fees). The last paper in the volume, by A. Mannekens, defines translation as practised and thought of by French writer A. Artaud. She uses the concept of mimesis, and questions concepts such as imitation and appropriation. The topics, approaches and methodologies underlying these Proceedings force us to take a fresh look at many of the seemingly well established paradigms and familiar notions, and open up new directions of research, reminding us that our object(s) of study is forever situated at a fluid and shifting interface with many other disciplines. We are very grateful to the organizers of the conference, who provided the setting out of which this volume emerged, and to all those authors and referees who gave generously of their time and skills and offered us their reliable cooperation in the process of assembling this volume. We also wish to express our appreciation to Andrew Chesterman for his painstaking proofreading of the final manuscript. The editors

part 1

Theory

What is a unique item? Andrew Chesterman University of Helsinki, Finland

The so-called unique items hypothesis claims that translations tend to contain fewer “unique items” than comparable non-translated texts. This is proposed as a potential translation universal, or at least a general tendency. A unique item is one that is in some sense specific to the target language and is presumably not so easily triggered by a source-language item that is formally different; it thus tends to be under-represented in translations. The concept of a unique item is not well-defined, however. Drawing on some earlier work on transfer, contrastive and error analysis, this article offers a critical analysis of the concept, and raises a number of methodological issues concerning research on the topic.

Keywords: unique items hypothesis, recurring patterns, comparable non-translated texts, linguistic resources, relative dissimilarity

1. Introducing the hypothesis In the context of research on what are often called translation universals, i.e. regular tendencies or recurring patterns in translations, Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit (2002) has proposed a “unique items hypothesis” according to which translations tend to contain fewer unique items than comparable non-translated texts.1 The hypothesis seems intuitively reasonable, and preliminary research results seem to support it (see also Tirkkonen-Condit 2004), at least with respect to certain items. Tirkkonen-Condit relates the hypothesis to two wider issues. One is the question of whether the language of translations is more normalized than that of non-translations: a lower-than-normal frequency of unique items would suggest that translations are not “normal” in this respect. This is a textlinguistic matter. The second issue is a psychological one, having to do with people’s intuitions about, and reactions to, texts, and in particular about their ability to recognize certain texts as being translations or not. The question here is whether informants use intuitions about unexpectedly low

Andrew Chesterman

frequencies of certain items when they are asked to distinguish translations from original texts – and to what extent they are successful in making such judgements. However, it is not clear what exactly is meant by a “unique item”. There are several problems in the way the concept is currently used. Here is how Tirkkonen-Condit introduces the idea (2002: 208–209): Katharina Reiss suggested some thirty years ago that translations may not fully exploit the linguistic resources of the target language. In discussing the devices of evaluating translation quality without recourse to the source text, Reiss (1971), following Güttinger (1963: 219), suggests a simple test: take the most frequent words in the target language that do not exist in the source language and check the extent to which these appear in the translation. These “missing words” will reveal whether the translator knows the target language well enough to attain good translation quality. This rule of thumb, according to Reiss (1971: 19) applies not only to the “missing words” but also to “alle Begriffe und Wendungen, die in der anderen Sprache mit unterschiedlichen sprachlichen Mitteln zum Ausdruck gebracht warden”. This discussion gives rise to another, potentially universal hypothesis [i.e. in addition to those concerning simplification etc.], which I will call the unique items hypothesis. This means that translated texts would manifest lower frequencies of linguistic elements that lack linguistic counterparts in the source languages such that these could also be used as translation equivalents. I will refer to these as unique items or unique elements. The unique elements are not untranslatable, and they may be frequent, typical and entirely normal phenomena in the language; they are unique only in respect of their translation potential, as they are not similarly manifested in other languages, or at least not similarly manifested in the source languages of the translations. (Square brackets added, emphasis original.)

As examples of unique items in Finnish she cites Finnish verbs like jaksaa, ehtiä, viitsiä; these could be translated into English as ‘be strong enough / have enough energy (to do something)’, ‘have enough time’, ‘have enough initiative / be interested enough’. These sufficiency verbs have traditionally been regarded as rather special to Finnish. Other languages seem to lack lexicalized equivalents and use phrasal expressions of some kind. And this is the point: the claim is that verbs like this are under-used in translations into Finnish, precisely because there is not a similar lexicalized verb in the source text which would “trigger” them in the translator’s mind. In a later paper (Tirkkonen-Condit 2004) she explains the notion of a unique item thus: Every language has linguistic elements that are unique in the sense that they lack straightforward linguistic counterparts in other languages. These elements may be lexical, phrasal, syntactic or textual, and they need not be in any sense untranslatable; they are simply not similarly manifested (e.g. lexicalized) in other languages. (2004: 177)

What is a unique item?

I want to focus here on the concept of the “unique item” itself. The hypothesis may be a fruitful one, well worth testing under different conditions; but there are a number of conceptual problems in the way it has been formulated that need to be sorted out first.

2. Unique with respect to what languages? The first problem is the context in which uniqueness is defined. Is the “uniqueness” defined with respect to a given source language, to several languages, or to all languages? The formulations cited above are slippery in this respect. In the 2002 article, the context is defined as “other languages, or at least... the source languages of the translations”. In 2004, it is “other languages”. In an email to me, Tirkkonen-Condit specifies that she is really focussing on the source languages of specific translations. In other words, no claim is being made about the uniqueness of, say, Finnish sufficiency verbs with respect to all other human languages. Testing such a claim would indeed be quite a task. We should therefore conclude that “unique” means “present in the target language, but not present in a similar way in a given source language”. This solution is exactly parallel to the definition of a cultureme (or culture-specific item) used by Nord (1997: 34) and other skopos theorists. A cultureme is a cultural phenomenon that is present in culture X but not present (in the same way) in culture Y. “Unique” is thus the opposite of “universal” only in a very weak sense. An item that is unique is one that does not appear (in the same way) in at least one other language: the source language. It might of course appear in any number of other languages, but that is not the point at issue, since the other languages are not involved in the particular translation at hand.

3. Absolutely unique? Is uniqueness an absolute property (i.e. given items either are, or are not, unique) or a relative one (i.e. some items can be more unique than others)? Despite the absoluteness that is perhaps implied in Reiss’ formulation, to which I shall return shortly, Tirkkonen-Condit’s incorporation of the notion of similarity in her definition surely forces the conclusion that this uniqueness can only be understood in a relative sense. Translationally equivalent items in two languages can be more or less similar, and moreover more or less similar in an infinite number of different ways. The less similar they are, the more unique a given target item is said to be; the degree of uniqueness depends inversely on the degree of similarity.

Andrew Chesterman

For instance, consider the following heading in my Finnish telephone book (both Finnish and Swedish are official languages in Finland): (1) Finnish: Soittaminen hätänumeroon 112 ‘ringing to.emergency.number 112’ (2) Swedish: Så.här ringer.du till nödnumret 112 ‘in.this.way you.ring to emergency.number 112’ The headings are printed one below the other, and are followed by detailed and equi valent instructions in both languages. Consider the kinds and levels of similarity or equivalence that are involved here. Apart from the obvious pragmatic/functional similarity, there are large formal differences: Finnish non-finite vs. Swedish finite clause; Swedish mention of the addressee, in second person singular; Swedish initial adverb; Finnish use of the illative case (‘to’) vs. Swedish preposition (till ‘to’). Both use a compound noun for ‘emergency number’, though. And both share the same thematic order “ring – emergency number – 112”. Now imagine that the source text for these instructions was Swedish, and that it is being translated into Finnish. Our Finnish translator could have followed the Swedish structure fairly closely, and written: (3) Näin soitat hätänumeroon. ‘thus you.ring to.emergency.number’ This solution is quite acceptable. It would have been readily prompted by the Swedish original. The printed Finnish version, however, uses the verbal noun construction with soittaminen ‘ringing’. This is very different from the Swedish structure in our imagined source text. In standard Swedish the use of a formally similar structure with a verbal noun (ringande) would not be acceptable here. But Swedish does allow the nominal use of an infinitive: att ringa ‘to ring’ could be used, although it would be less natural. So: is the Finnish verbal noun construction a unique item? Is it “more unique” to Finnish than the use of the illative case, which is also not available as such in Swedish? The answer will depend on the criteria chosen to measure uniqueness. The point of this example is simply to underline that the uniqueness under discussion here must be understood in a relative sense, as ‘relative dissimilarity’. This means that we are already weakening the semantic content of the term.

4. How do we identify uniqueness? The suggestion made by Reiss (1971), that we should look for “words” in the target language that do not exist in the source language, can hardly be taken at its face value: of course, all the words in a given target language “do not exist” in a given source language, except for possible loanwords from the same source language. In the passages

What is a unique item?

cited above, Tirkkonen-Condit wrote of “elements that lack linguistic counterparts”, or “that lack straightforward linguistic counterparts”. This is loosely glossed as “elements that are not similarly manifested” or not “lexicalized”. This gloss, and the preceding definitions, are much too loose, because the nature of the required similarity is not made explicit. If we identify a unique item in terms of the non-existence of a straightforward, one-to-one equivalent in some other language(s), this depends in turn on what we mean by equivalence, and by this particular kind of equivalence. We are presumably talking about some kind of formal equivalence here, but at what level of delicacy? If a verb (such as a Finnish sufficiency verb, like ehtiä) is translated into English as a phrase (e.g. verb+object+adverb: ‘have time enough’), we have an instance of what Catford (1965: 79) called a unit shift. The units are morpheme, word, group (phrase), clause, sentence. (We might also add higher units such as paragraph, section or chapter, text.) In this case, the shift is from word to group (phrase). Formal shifts of a more delicate kind occur when a translator shifts from one source-text verb class (say, transitive) to a different one in the target text (intransitive), or from a mass noun to a count noun (examples of Catford’s class shifts), or from e.g. singular to plural (Catford’s intra-system shift). However, shifts of these kinds do not seem to be among those suggesting the existence of unique items, in the sense described by Tirkkonen-Condit. Nor do cruder kinds of shifts involving major restructuring, omissions or additions. Nor even higher-level unit shifts, such as those from sentence to clause or clause to group, or vice versa. The key level seems to be that of the word or the morpheme. Tirkkonen-Condit’s other main examples concern certain Finnish particles. However, she also mentions idioms, which may be manifested as strings as long as a clause. Her examples include the following types of unique items for Finnish (2002: 215):

1. clitic and other particles (e.g. -pa/pä signifying emphasis)

2. colloquial lexical items, sufficiency verbs (e.g. viitsiä ‘have enough initiative’)

3. idioms, fixed collocations, set phrases (e.g. kaikki on katoavaista ‘everything is ephemeral’)

4. word order (idiomatic use of clause-initial copula in the possessive structure: on teillä ‘is at-you’ – i.e. ‘you have’ – instead of teillä on ‘at-you is’)

5. use of impersonal reference (impersonal verb: täytyy muistaa ‘(one) must remember’)

My preliminary answer to the question of how to identify uniqueness is that an item counts as unique if it cannot be readily translated back into a given source language without a unit shift. “Readily” is slippery, I admit. But so, I am arguing, is the whole concept of a unique item. This answer also allows the inclusion of (most) idioms as unique items, for their translation usually requires unit shifts at some level. One problem with

Andrew Chesterman

this answer is that the definition of the basic units themselves may not be so obvious if we turn to less commonly studied languages outside Standard Average European. This preliminary answer derives from early research of a very similar kind in contrastive and error analysis. In a classic paper on “Over-indulgence and under-representation – aspects of mother-tongue interference”, Levenston (1971: 115) wrote: One feature of non-native use of a second language, or L2, is the excessive use (‘over-indulgence’) of clause (or group) structures which closely resemble translation equivalents in the mother tongue, or L1, to the exclusion of other structures (‘under-representation’) which are less like anything in L1. ‘Closely resemble’ can be more precisely defined as ‘with translation equivalents which correspond at the level of group (or word) as well as clause’; ‘less like’ means with translation equi valents which correspond at the level of clause (or group) only.

Levenston was not studying translations as such, but non-native use of a language (English as used by Hebrew speakers). But he used translation equivalence in his conceptualization of elements that appear more or less frequently than expected in L2 usage. He defines his notion of relevant similarity in terms of unit correspondence at different levels. This might offer us an alternative formulation of a unique item (cf. Levenston’s under-represented item): it is one for which the translation equivalent only maintains unit correspondence at some higher level or levels, not at given lower levels. The higher the lowest possible level of unit correspondence, the less the similarity. For instance, a translation equivalent preserving unit correspondence only at sentence level, but not lower, would be less similar than an equivalent preserving unit correspondence also at group or word level. Consider the translation of proverbs, for example, for which unit correspondence is usually only maintained at the sentence level, not below. Translations that preserve unit correspondence only at higher levels are of course freer translations.

5. Linguistically or perceptually unique? Is the uniqueness assumed to exist in some psychological sense, as part of the translator’s perception of the languages concerned, or in a linguistic sense, as part of the lexico-grammatical systems of the given languages? In other words, are the items really unique (in the sense specified above), or does the translator just think they are? I shall refer to these two interpretations as linguistic difference (i.e. one that is objectively proved by contrastive evidence) and perceived difference (which may or may not also be objectively substantiated). Levenston’s paper combines these two interpretations, in that he brings in the psychological notion of interference from the native language to explain why over-indulgence and under-representation occur. But they should perhaps be kept separate. Speakers of a given language, especially non-native speakers, may not have an accurate

What is a unique item?

perception of what is “unique” to that language in the sense I suggested above, i.e. with respect to some other given language. Levenston was studying non-native usage; but it is also worth recalling that translators may also be working into a non-native language. Here too, early work in contrastive analysis may be revealing. I am thinking in particular of work by Eric Kellerman (e.g. 1986) and Terence Odlin (e.g. 1991) on speakers’ perceptions of the languages they use. Kellerman’s studies examined whether Dutch students would be willing to transfer Dutch idioms literally into English in cases where such a translation would in fact have been acceptable. His results suggested that native speakers may overestimate the degree of linguistic uniqueness of items in their native language: there were many examples of idioms that could have been transferred verbatim, but these students did not feel that it would be possible because they were felt to be typically Dutch and hence non-transferable. Odin (1991) queries Kellerman’s interpretation of these results, and provides rather different kinds of evidence from his study of language mixing by bilinguals in Ireland. He found plenty of evidence of the direct transfer of Irish idioms into English, but proposed to account for these in terms of environmental and sociological factors such as the number of bilinguals in the community. Other scholars in contrastive and error analysis have proposed an avoidance strategy (see Faerch and Kasper 1983), whereby L2-learners or users tend to avoid items that are difficult; these difficult items often being ones that are “different” in the two languages. We are in fact not too far from Lado’s initial contrastive hypothesis (1957: 2) that differences between L1 and L2 will cause learning difficulties whereas similarities will facilitate learning. However, the avoidance strategy depends on perceived difference whereas Lado’s hypothesis is based on linguistic difference. In the case of the unique items hypothesis, we are not dealing with transfer. Our interest is in items that are under-used because translators tend to prefer alternative expressions that are formally closer to the source text. Thus:

ST I do not have enough time for research.

will tend to be translated into Finnish as TT1 Minulla ei ole tarpeeksi aikaa tutkimukseen. ‘at.me is not enough time for.research’ rather than TT2 En ehdi tehdä tutkimusta. ‘I.do.not have.enough.time to.do research’ The TT2 version uses the Finnish “unique” verb ehtiä, ‘to have enough time’, but this is evidently not readily triggered by the English, which lacks such a verb. Moreover, we cannot appeal to notions of perception, because the whole point of the hypothesis is that the target unique items are not perceived (or at least: not perceived as belonging to the same register); they are not even triggered. My conclusion is therefore that our hypothesis must be concerned with linguistic uniqueness. However,



Andrew Chesterman

this uniqueness is assumed to have consequences at the level of cognitive processing. It follows that research methods based on questionnaires or translation identity tasks may not be good ways of testing the hypothesis, since they tap perceived uniqueness, not linguistic uniqueness. Linguistic uniqueness can be more objectively determined with the use of grammars, dictionaries, corpora and contrastive analysis.

6. Are unique items unique to translation? To the extent that translations can be successfully distinguished from non-translations – by naive informants, and/or by researchers using objective statistical methods – we can infer that there may be something about (some?) translations that makes them recognizably different. The unique items hypothesis claims that translations under-use unique items, for instance, in the sense explicated above. Does this difference itself amount to a kind of uniqueness, or are the potential distinguishing features of (these) translations similar to those of certain other kinds of texts as well, such as those produced under special time constraints or language proficiency conditions? Here again I return to earlier research in contrastive analysis and interlanguage studies, the avoidance hypothesis and the notion of simplification in learners’ language. (See Faerch and Kasper 1983 again.) There is a good deal of evidence in the literature to suggest that L2-speakers tend to prefer structures that are similar to those in their L1 (cf. Levenston, above). This corresponds exactly to Tirkkonen-Condit’s speculation that novice translators, even when translating into their native language, tend to prefer literal strategies whenever possible. It even agrees with the advice offered by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958), Newmark (1981: 39) and others, to the effect that literal, close translation is a good default strategy. One consequence of this strategy is of course that the risk of interference – i.e. unwanted, negative transfer – increases. Another risk is that unique items get forgotten, as predicted by the unique items hypothesis. I thus suggest that the unique items hypothesis is not unique to translation, but also applies to other communication contexts in which extra difficulties are present, such as the need to speak or write in a second language. In other words, it implies a more general cognitive constraint on language use under certain conditions. This in turn raises questions about the structure of the linguistic repertoires in the mind, about what kinds of things might be central or more readily accessible in this repertoire and what kinds of things might be less readily accessible. It also raises questions about the status of other so-called translation universals, which may turn out not to be universal specifically to translation but rather to what we could call extra-constrained communication in general.

What is a unique item?

7. Is “unique item” a good term? In the light of the above discussion, the answer to this question is perhaps “no”. The notion of uniqueness seems to be too strong, in several respects. Uniqueness is relative rather than absolute; the hypothesis refers to particular sets of source and target languages rather than to all languages; uniqueness can be defined only rather loosely in the contrastive terms of relative formal difference; and the phenomenon in question may not be unique to translation but may also be typical of second-language usage. To phrase the hypothesis in terms of “uniqueness” thus implies stronger claims than are actually being made. Compare the sense of the term “lacuna” (also referred to as a semantic void or lexical gap), as traditionally used in Translation Studies. This is usually understood as the absence in the target language of a (non-shifted) equivalent of some word or expression in the source language. What we have been calling a unique item seems to be the opposite of a lacuna, in some sense: in our case, the absence is not in the target language but in the source language, and the “gap” is formal rather than semantic. Unique items are perhaps no more than formal source lacunas. Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit (personal communication) also speaks of “linguistic asymmetry” in this respect. Such asymmetry may be quantitative as well as qualitative. Languages may simply have “preferred means” for expressing a given meaning or function. This point admittedly argues against the term “lacuna”, which indicates more of an absolute difference, the presence of a definite “gap”.

8. Is the cart before the horse? My final question returns to issues of research methodology. We have seen that there are problems with defining unique items a priori. However, if we are looking for instances of this category, we of course need to know in advance what we are looking for. The best way out of this quandary is, I suggest, to adjust the research methodology. This in fact means returning to the initial intuitions and observations that gave rise to the hypothesis in the first place, and also to the insights of earlier scholars in contrastive analysis. In other words, the research process would look like this:

1. Use contrastive corpus studies to investigate which items manifest significantly different frequencies in translations (TT) vs. non-translations (NT).

2. Divide the items manifesting significantly different frequencies into those occurring more frequently in TT and those occurring more frequently in NT. It turns out, for instance, that Finnish sufficiency verbs occur more often in nontranslated Finnish than in translated Finnish. And see e.g. Olohan and Baker (2000) on the over-representation of reporting that in English translations.





Andrew Chesterman

3. Rank the items according to degree of frequency difference. Focus on those items whose frequency differences across the two corpora (TT and NT) are highest, above some arbitrary threshold. We will thus have two sets of items. The first set contains items that are clearly over-represented in the translations studied, and the second set those that are clearly under-represented there.

4. Then consider explanations for these results. In the case of the under-represented items (such as Finnish sufficiency verbs in Finnish translations), one explanatory hypothesis might be formulated in terms of formal distance. That is: the greater the formal (syntactic) distance between a given source-language item and an appropriate corresponding target-language item, the less likely it is to be selected by translators. (This hypothesis obviously needs a way of measuring formal distance; Catford’s classification of shifts could be taken as a starting-point, as suggested above.) The under-represented items that are thus formally “very different” from their source-language equivalents will include those that we have been calling unique items. Note, however, that the under-represented set may also include items that are not readily explained in this way; i.e. some of these items may not be unique in this sense.

This way of looking at the methodological process does not start with the idea of a unique item. Here, the uniqueness of an item is defined operationally, in overtly relative terms, and a posteriori. Uniqueness, in the sense explicated in this section, is here postulated as part of one possible explanation for the occurrence of under-represented items in translations. Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit (personal communication) suggests an alternative methodology, which is in fact closer to the one she has used herself. Start from contrastive analyses of given language pairs. Select items which turn out to have the “same” semantic or pragmatic meaning, but which are formally different in the two languages (or where formal equivalents actually have different functions). Then compare the frequencies of these items in translations and non-translations. I note nevertheless that this method needs a careful a priori interpretation of levels of formal equivalence, as argued above.

9. What’s the point? One reason to study potential translation universals is simply to understand more about translation in general, about the nature of translating. This research may also tell us something about the varying tolerance for interference. For those with psycholinguistic research goals, work on these potential universals may also bring new insights into what goes on in the translator’s mind. For scholars looking for practical applications, and for trainers of translators, research on universals may suggest ways to improve the quality of translations. By ex-

What is a unique item?

plicitly drawing the attention of trainees to items that are typically under- or over-represented in translations, we can encourage future translators to use these items more or less frequently than they might otherwise have done. In so doing, in the long term, we may even have some effect on these tendencies themselves. They might even become less universal...

References Catford, John C. 1975. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press. Faerch, Claus and Gabriele Kasper (eds). 1983. Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London: Longman. Güttinger, Fritz. 1963. Zielsprache: Theorie und Technik des Übersetzens. Zürich: Manesse Verlag. Kellerman, Eric. 1986. “An Eye for an Eye: Crosslinguistic constraints on the development of the L2 lexicon”. In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition, E. Kellerman and M. Sharwood Smith (eds), 35–48. New York: Pergamon Press. Lado, Robert. 1957. Linguistics across Cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Levenston, Edward A. 1971. “Over-indulgence and Under-representation – Aspects of Mothertongue Interference”. In Papers in Contrastive Linguistics, G. Nickel (ed.), 115–121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Newmark, Peter. 1981. Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Nord, Christiane. 1997. Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Odin, Terence. 1991. “Irish English idioms and language transfer”. English World-Wide 12 (2): 175–193. Olohan, Maeve and Baker, Mona. 2000. “Reporting that in Translated English. Evidence for subconscious processes of explicitation?” Across Languages and Cultures 1 (2): 141–158. Reiss, Katharina. 1971. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik. München: Max Hueber. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 2002. “Translationese – a Myth or an Empirical Fact?” Target 14 (2): 207–220. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 2004. “Unique Items – Over- or Under-represented in Translated Language?” In Translation Universals. Do they exist?, A. Mauranen and P. Kujamäki (eds), 177–184. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Vinay, Jean-Paul and Darbelnet, Jean. 1958. Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais. Paris: Didier.

Note 1

I am grateful for Sonja Tirkkonen-Condit’s helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.



Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies Ubaldo Stecconi European Commission, Brussels, Belgium

Using the theoretical and methodological framework of C.S. Peirce’s theory of signs, I move from the assumption that translation is a special form of sign–action or semiosis. Simply stated, this means that all translating is semiosis but not all semiosis is translating. I will try to show that semiotics is good for Translation Studies for (at least) five reasons: – – – – –

it is a theory of signs in general, not of verbal language; it provides a viable model for the core of translation events; it redefines the traditional image of translating as transfer; it casts new light on equivalence and loss; and it affords an investigation of the logico-semiotic conditions to translation in general.

The last point is crucial. Three existential characters can be identified for translation semiosis: difference, similarity, and mediation. Together, they can help us frame a fundamental question: “What do we talk about when we talk about translation?”

Keywords: Translation semiotics, Charles S. Peirce, equivalence, transfer

1. Introduction In 2003 Umberto Eco brought out two books on translation. The one in English was titled Mouse or Rat (Eco 2003a); the one in Italian was Dire quasi la stessa cosa (Eco



Ubaldo Stecconi

2003b), which means “Saying Almost the Same Thing”. A passage in the opening pages of the latter reads: What does translating mean? We would like the first, reassuring reply to be: ‘saying the same thing in another language’. Unfortunately, establishing what ‘saying the same thing’ means is highly problematic. We cannot be sure because of all the operations involved, namely paraphrasing, defining, explaining, and rephrasing; let alone the claims of synonym replacement. Also, looking at a text to be translated we cannot tell what the thing is. Finally, sometimes we cannot even tell what saying is (p. 9).1

Eco concludes that a translation can never ‘say the same thing’; however – he adds – it can say almost the same thing: “At this point, the interesting problem is no longer the conception of the same thing, nor that of the thing itself. It is the conception of almost” (id.: 10). I will analyse all the terms in Eco’s Italian title (rearranged to suit my argument) to illustrate the advantages of a semiotic model of translation I have been developing over the past few years (cf. Proni and Stecconi 1999 and Stecconi 1994, 2000, 2001, 2004a, 2004b).2 However, before I do that, I would like to give you a brief survey of translation semiotics.

2. The strange case of translation semiotics The semiotics of translation is a bit of a mystery. Although several seminal texts in Translation Studies call for semiotic approaches, to this day the exploration of the nexus between translation and interpretive semiotics is still an exotic journey. It all started with Roman Jakobson’s “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation” (Jakobson 1959), certainly the single most quoted entry in Translation Studies literature. Although the Russian linguist probably misunderstood Peirce (Bonfantini 1987: 113 and Gorlée 1994: 148; see also Cosculluela 2003: 113–5 for a kinder position) he did style him “the deepest inquirer into the essence of signs” (Jakobson 1959: 233). The next promising start for translation semiotics was Aloysius van Kesteren’s contribution to the proceedings of the famous “Literature and Translation” conference held in Leuven, Belgium, on 27–29 April 1976 (van Kesteren 1978). The plan of this excellent study read as follows: “The goal of this attempt is to develop a semiotic model for translation theory. More specifically, a typology of equivalence relationships between a source text and a target text will be established […]. For this purpose I shall make use of various concepts developed long ago by Peirce […]” (Id.: 48). The third name on my list is Gideon Toury for his contribution to the “Translation” entry in Thomas Sebeok’s monumental Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics (Toury 1986). In this essay, Toury did not use interpretive semiotics (at least not explicitly; references are made only to structural semioticians such as Lotman and Uspenskij); however its conclusions were largely compatible with it. The last two ‘founding fathers’ of translation semiotics are – in fact – founding mothers: Janice Deledalle-Rhodes and Dinda Liesbeth Gorlée, both of whom began to publish on

Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies 

translation semiotics towards the end of the 1980s (cf. Deledalle-Rhodes 1988–1989, 1996, 1997 and Gorlée 1989, 1994, 2004). Gorlée 1989, titled “Wittgenstein, Translation and Semiotics” appeared in the maiden issue of Target; and this qualifies it as the last notable promising beginning in translation semiotics. As you can see, Peirce’s theory of signs was right there when contemporary Translation Studies was born. Although semiotics has not (yet) become a mainstream paradigm for translation theory, a sizeable body of literature does exist. Apart from the five authors cited above, interesting contributions to the field have come from Torop, Petrilli, Eco, Nergaard, and Cosculluela (for instance, cf. Torop 2000, Petrilli ed. 2003, Eco 2001, Nergaard 2001 and Cosculluela 2003). If I had only one phrase to characterise this group, it would have to be ‘brave and optimistic’. They are brave because semiotics encourages original approaches and a broad re-definition of traditional categories; they are optimistic because – as a consequence – many predict that semiotics is the future of translation theory. Only time will tell.

3. Saying I can now proceed with my plan. In the following sections I will gloss Umberto Eco’s title phrase: ‘Saying almost the same thing’, starting with the term ‘saying’. Eco asked ‘can we tell what saying is’? A sense of this question takes the term ‘saying’ as a figure, as when we look at a painting and ask: “What does it say to you?”. So, I would like to ask a simpler question: in how many ways can we say things? Clearly, a painting and a book would say things in different ways because they are different media, and this is the sense of the question I wish to explore. A concern for different media is fairly new to translators because translating has traditionally been defined as a linguistic operation. However, if it is true that translators often deal with words, it does not follow that words define translating. Roman Jakobson famously introduced the notion of intersemiotic translation almost 50 years ago (Jakobson 1959). More recently, intersemiotic translation has taken on a more practical sense due to the changes brought to the profession by information technology and the internet. These new forms of translating (especially its variety called ‘localisation’) involve words as well as the nonverbal signs that may appear on a computer screen such as colours, still and moving pictures, and sounds. Partly as a response to the rise of localisation, Translation Studies discovered Multimedia Translation in the 90s (e.g., Esselink 2000; Gambier 1998; Gambier and Gottlieb 2001; and Pym 2004). When confronted with media-rich environments, translators become acutely aware that they need to look beyond words to carry out their tasks and make sense of what they’re doing. Multimedia Translation shows the limitations of theories based on verbal language and calls for a general theory of translation that overcomes the distinction between verbal and nonverbal signs. This is the first reason why semiotics is good for Translation Studies, because semiotics is a general theory of signs which regards natural language



Ubaldo Stecconi

as just one semiotic system among many – albeit of special importance. Peirce’s conception of sign vastly exceeds natural language: […] the entire universe – not merely the universe of existents, but all that wider universe, embracing the universe of existents as a part, the universe which we are all accustomed to refer to as “the truth” – that all this universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs (CP 5.448 n1, 1905).3

Peirce was not primarily concerned with how language worked or how people used it to communicate; his main semiotic interest has always been understanding how signs and sign–action work, which are metaphysical and logical problems. On these premises, it will be easy to see that semiotics can help us take the lesson of multimediality seriously and suggest that translating is not existentially defined by language. Translating is not something we do only with words, but something we do to words and to other signs as well. A corollary to this demotion of verbal language is the sense of the term ‘text’ used in this paper. Although ‘text’ is often understood as being made up primarily or exclusively of words, here the term refers to an organised set of signs – no matter whether verbal or nonverbal.

4. Thing The second term I wish to discuss is ‘thing’. Eco asked: ‘what is the thing of the original?’. Semiotics can frame this question in interesting ways. According to Peirce’s theory of signs, representations do stand for things – commonly known as ‘objects’ – but the relation between objects and signs is not binary. Objects are part of triads which also include signs and interpretants. Here is a famous definition of a sign: A sign, or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign. The sign stands for something, its object. It stands for that object, not in all respects, but in reference to a sort of idea, which I have sometimes called the ground of the representamen (CP 2.228, c. 1897).

These basic elements of semiosis are often represented around a triangle as in Figure 1. The diagram graphically shows the main function of signs, which is that of mediating between objects and interpretants. Let me highlight two features of genuine semiosis: i) it always implies inference and ii) in principle, the interpretant of a sign can always be interpreted by another sign.

Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies  interpretant

sign

object

Figure 1.

This much for sign and interpretant. As regards the object – i.e., the ‘thing’ of a Peircean sign – I would like to use the story of the Constitutum Constantini, or the Donation of Constantine. As is known, in the Middle Ages, the document was attributed to Emperor Constantine, who had ruled between ad 306 and 337, and was used to legitimate the Church’s worldly possessions. In 1440 Lorenzo Valla showed that the document was a forgery, probably from the eighth century.4 Think of Valla’s study as just one sign and of the Donation of Constantine as its object. Valla’s treatise did not materially alter a single word in the older document; so, in this respect, the Donation did not change. But Valla’s sign provided a fresh point of view or ‘ground’ on the Donation which, as a result, produced radically different interpretants (on Peirce’s notion of ‘ground’, cf. CP 1.1–10, 1868 and CP 2.227–229, 1897). So, from a pragmatic point of view, the Donation became another text altogether. How can one reconcile this paradox? The answer is that objects have two sides: “it is necessary to distinguish the Immediate Object, or the Object as the Sign represents it, from the Dynamical Object, or really efficient but not immediately present Object” (CP 8.343, 1908). The immediate object is filtered by the sign through its ground and is already part of semiosis; the dynamical object is a natural or cultural entity, it is unknowable in its totality, and it is the efficient cause of the sign. So, to go back to Valla, in 1440 the dynamical object remained unaffected, but Valla created a new immediate object corresponding to the fresh ground he adopted for his treatise. In short, the Donation of Constantine became the alleged Donation of Constantine. Figure 2 introduces the two objects in our diagram of the elements of the sign. interpretant

sign

Figure 2.

immediate object dynamical object



Ubaldo Stecconi

This theory of the object is a less impressionistic description of the ‘thing’. We now have the full picture: object, sign, and interpretant. It is important to note that these elements are part of a triad. T.L. Short wrote a scintillating paragraph on this point. A sign is one element of an indivisible triad: object, sign, and interpretant. Nothing is an object which is not signifiable; nothing is a sign that is not interpretable as signifying some object; and nothing is an interpretant that does not interpret something as signifying an object. An object need not be signified and a sign need not be interpreted; but they are what they are in virtue of potential signs and potential interpretants, respectively. These potentialities are more than mere possibilities. Something is a sign in virtue of a ground – or relation of sign to object – that would justify a particular interpretation of it (Short 1986: 105).

The second reason why semiotics is good for Translation Studies is that the diagram in Figure 2 is a viable model for translation events. The source text is a semiotic object, the target text is a sign, and what the translation signifies to those who receive it is an interpretant. Translation can gain a lot from this model because, among other things, it is non-deterministic. Eco’s main point – in both his English and Italian books – was that negotiation plays a crucial role in translating. I agree with this insight and I would like to take it a bit further. I believe negotiation can be located at the very core of translation semiosis. On the one hand, the target and source texts negotiate a ground of representation; on the other, the target receivers and the translation negotiate to establish signification. Of course, unlike Eco’s, this is metaphysical negotiation; but I believe a theory of translation must come to terms with its metaphysics. Figure 3 graphically represents this state of affairs. receivers’ interpretant

target text

immediate original dynamical original

Figure 3.

The figure says that the ‘thing’ of translation semiosis is a twofold object, itself part of a triad. To paraphrase Short’s quote above: nothing is an original that is not translatable; nothing is a target text that is not interpretable as translating some original; and nothing is a target-receiver’s interpretant that does not interpret some text as translating an original. The arrows that appear in all my diagrams keep reminding us that semiosis is sign production, rather the signs produced or involved in the process. The

Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies 

notion that semiosis is sign–action applies to translation semiosis as well. This means that in translation semiosis ‘things’ follow events not only empirically, but primarily from a logical point of view. This is important for Translation Studies. Translation has been held captive by its etymology for centuries: transferre, ‘to carry across’ (cf. Folena 1991 on the history of the word). The figure is misleading. When you carry a glass across your home, say from the kitchen to the living room, you will no longer find the glass in the kitchen. But when you translate an Italian novel into English, Italians will continue to read it. Clearly, transferre is not a good trope for translation. It is true that this trope, like all tropes, shapes and makes possible our thinking about translation; but I maintain that the resulting cognitive horizon is unhelpful. The third reason why semiotics is good for Translation Studies is that it helps us break free of precisely these metaphorical bounds. Translating does not involve transferring words, meaning or what have you like a parcel in the mail. When one translates nothing is transferred, nothing moves. Like all signs, translations happen.

5. The same The next term I will analyse is ‘the same’, which points at what is normally referred to in the literature as ‘equivalence’. I consider the idea of absolute equivalence as the original sin of Western translation theory. It is generally believed that the earliest glimmer of translation theory in the West is Cicero’s De optimo genere oratorum of ca. 44 BC (cf. Copeland 1991: 9–36 for a discussion). In it, Cicero stated that he did not follow the custom to write word for word as he would have done in his capacity as a translator; he chose to write as an orator instead. Non enim ea me adnumerare lectori putavi oportere, sed tamquam appendere. “So, I did not consider it necessary for the reader that I counted [the words], but that I weighed them, as it were” (V.14, my translation).5 Even though Cicero offered an alternative, we can infer that word-for-word equivalence was regarded as a viable translation strategy between Greek and Latin in his time. I believe a strict notion of equivalence is, in fact, a sin of pride or vanity because it rests on a semiotically unsustainable belief in the powers of translation. All sign–action – including translating – is incompatible with equivalent relations between its elements; at most we can speak of similarity relations. If an element – say, the sign – were equivalent to the object, sign–action would grind to a halt. As I remarked earlier, a sign represents its object from a certain ground. For translation semiosis, this implies that there must be a difference between the dynamical original ‘out there’ and the immediate original. It follows that a translation-sign can never be a full representation of the original-object; there must always be a residue left for the next sign to use. Therefore, finding a target sign equivalent to the source cannot even be an ideal goal for translators. After studying and interpreting the source sign in view of its translation, one needs to decide from which viewpoint the target sign will represent it (cf. Eco 2003b:



Ubaldo Stecconi

16–17 for a similar position). Obviously, once the choice is made, other possible and competing viewpoints are excluded, but it would be wrong to conclude that the ‘road not taken’ is a loss. As was the case with transfer, the trope of loss does not match the semiotic nature of translating and distorts our very cognitive horizon. What the translation does not reveal of the original is not a loss but something that you can never gain. The original may still reveal its secrets, but only to the next translation. Most crucially, the resistance of the original is precisely what makes translation possible. In fact, what people call ‘loss’ results from one of the conditions of translation semiosis – namely difference (see below). This is the fourth reason why semiotics is good for Translation Studies: like all semiosis, translating happens because of the selection of a ground, not in spite of it.

6. Almost I will finish with the term ‘almost’. Eco added it to ‘say the same thing’ as a quantitative precaution. He asked: “How elastic should this ‘almost’ be?” (id.: 10). I would like to move the argument onto qualitative grounds. Our earlier discussion of the term ‘the same’ involved equivalence and loss; here, the passage from ‘saying the same thing’ to ‘saying almost the same thing’ corresponds to the passage from equivalence to similarity. I believe similarity is one of the three hallmarks of translation semiosis, together with difference and mediation (cf. Stecconi 2004a). So far, we have seen what translating shares with other forms of semiosis, but there is also something that sets translation apart. If this were not the case, it would not make sense to ask “what all of us are talking about when we talk about translation, the very object of our inquiry” (Arrojo 2002: 138). Two words of caution before I proceed. First, the analogy between translating and other forms of semiosis is indeed so strong that the two terms have often been made to overlap. Chesterman (1997) argues that one the most recurrent ideas in translation (his ‘supermemes’) is ‘all writing is translating’. This meme is undoubtedly fascinating, but it does not help one clarify what one calls translation in the first place. It is also strategically unhelpful because semiosis is more general than translation semiosis; therefore, one should use semiosis to explain what translation is like, rather than using translation to explain what semiosis is like. Second, everyone knows that translation is a variable concept in space and time. For this reason, looking for the very object of inquiry of Translation Studies is a risky venture. However, as argued by Peeter Torop, “[a]s an object of study culture allows for too many different definitions for [a general theory of culture] to be possible. In Translation Studies the possibilities of defining the object of study are much more limited” (Torop 2002: 594). On the strength of his authority, I would like to flesh out my hypothesis that translating is a special and identifiable form of semiosis.

Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies 

In its most general terms, translation can be divided in three entities according to Peirce’s existential categories: events (Second), logico-semiotic conditions (First), and norms (Third. On the categories, cf. CP 1.300–353, various years and CP 5.41–92, 1903). Regardless of the variability of translation events and norms, one can look for what I call the Foundation of translation, which is its Firstness or general possibility. Difference, similarity and mediation are the logico-semiotic conditions to translation that specify this possibility. They are not positive features that would define translation in essential or universal terms. Indeed, a positive characterisation can only result from the interplay between translation’s conditions, events, and norms. The conditions are, so to speak, negative terms. Thanks to them, one could tell what translation is not, rather than what it is. Difference (Second), similarity (First), and mediation (Third), in turn, constitute another Peircean triad. I will close this paper with a quick discussion of these three components of the Foundation of translation. Translating presupposes a significant difference between semiotic systems. This is the most tangible and intuitive feature because, like everything in the category of Secondness, it is anchored to real and actual events. The most obvious type of difference in translation is the one between natural languages. However, difference, as it is represented in the Foundation of translation semiosis, is the mere possibility of such barrier. Along a similar line of argument, Hermans wrote of a “definition of translation as a verbal representation of an anterior text across an intelligibility barrier” (in Schäffner ed. 1999: 79). I agree, but there are other barriers as well. As we have seen in the discussion of Multimedia Translation, translating means controlling all the means of expression of a text in the target environment, verbal and nonverbal alike. Let us now move to similarity. Even if a significant semiotic difference were observed, one could not logically speak of translation without assuming some reference to similarity as well. On a practical level, this means that translators use source signs, collateral signs and some notion of similarity to infer target signs. On a general level, it means that translation semiosis aims at producing signs that are similar to other signs organised in a source text. In my Foundation, similarity is neither empirical nor general; it is in fact a potentiality that individuals and communities determine and, in time, turn into translation’s established ‘equivalences’ and norms. Mediation is the third corner of the Foundation of translation. There would be no translation if the target text did not speak on behalf of the source. Translations have ‘power of attorney’ from their originals; they represent originals as agents. This feature has been remarked by several authors: Vilen Kommissarov, reopening the debate on Toury’s notion of ‘assumed translation’, wrote “a text in the target language designed to serve as a plenipotentiary representative of the source text […]” (Kommissarov 1996: 370); Brian Mossop defined translation as reported speech and translating as: “X is reporting to C what A said/wrote/signed to B” (Mossop 1998: 239); finally, Petrilli presented a similar position when she said that translation is “indirect speech disguised as direct speech” (Petrilli 1999/2000: 12, my translation). These insights are all subsumed under my term ‘mediation’. Let me give you an example of it. In liaison in-



Ubaldo Stecconi

terpreting, the translator alternatively speaks on behalf of the two or more people engaged in conversation. Speakers who are not used to this form of communication may address the translator directly. When this happens, the flow of communication is short-circuited and the conversation grinds to a halt because the translator can no longer ‘speak on behalf ’ of someone else. This is the fifth and final reason why semiotics is good for Translation Studies: it brings together difference, similarity, and mediation as the Foundation of translation. Thus, we can finally hope to tackle the million-dollar question: “What do we talk about when we talk about translation?”

Notes 1.

The translation of all quotations from Eco 2003b is mine. The emphases were in the original.

2. By ‘semiotics’ I refer to the theory of signs of the American polymath C.S. Peirce (1839– 1914) and further developed by Morris, Sebeok, Eco and others. I will not refer to the tradition initiated by Ferdinand de Saussure (1857–1913) – sometimes labelled sémiologie – and followed among others by Lotman, Barthes, Greimas. Although the distinction between the two traditions is not clear-cut; here is a quick characterisation: Peirce focussed on sign interpretation and on how a culture produces and gives currency to signs. Saussure focussed on the structural aspects of sign systems and signification. 3. References to Peirce’s Collected Papers (Peirce 1931–1958) are given in the usual two-part number. The quotation, for instance, is from book 5, paragraph 448. 4. Both texts are at http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallatc.html (last checked 25 August 2006). 5. The current version of this passage in the English-speaking world is from the Loeb edition (Cicero 1949): “For I did not think I ought to count them out to the reader like coins, but to pay them by weight, as it were”. A tradition of interpretation exists that owes more to the introduction of coins and payment than to Cicero’s original statement. See Robinson (1997) for an extreme case.

References Arrojo, Rosemarie. 2002. “Lessons Learned from Babel”. Target 14 (1): 137–148. Bonfantini, Massimo A. 1987. La semiosi e l’abduzione. Milan: Bompiani. Chesterman, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation: The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Cicero, Marcus T. 1949. De inventione; De optimo genere oratorum; Topica. Translated by H. M. Hubbell, The Loeb classical library; 386. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Copeland, Rita. 1991. Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages: Academic Traditions and Vernacular Texts, Cambridge studies in medieval literature; 11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cosculluela, Cécile. 2003. “Semiotics and Translation Studies: An Emerging Interdisciplinarity”. Semiotica 145 (1–4): 105–137.

Five reasons why semiotics is good for Translation Studies 

Deledalle-Rhodes, Janice. 1988–1989. “La traduction dans les systèmes sémiotiques”. Etudes Littéraires 21 (3): 211–221. Deledalle-Rhodes, Janice. 1996. “The Transposition of the Linguistic Sign in Peirce’s Contributions to The Nation”. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 32 (4): 668–682. Deledalle-Rhodes, Janice. 1997. “Peirce: Culture and Continuity”. S – European Journal for Semiotic Studies. Eco, Umberto. 2001. Experiences in Translation. Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press. Eco, Umberto. 2003a. Mouse or Rat?: Translation as Negotiation. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Eco, Umberto. 2003b. Dire quasi la stessa cosa. Esperienze di traduzione. Milan: Bompiani. Esselink, Bert. 2000. A Practical Guide to Localization. Rev. ed, Language international world directory; 4. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Folena, Gianfranco. 1991. Volgarizzare e tradurre. Turin: Einaudi. Gambier, Yves. 1998. Translating for the Media. Turku: University of Turku. Gambier, Yves and Gottlieb, Henrik. 2001. (Multi)media Translation: Concepts, Practices, and Research. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gorlée, Dinda L. 1989. “Wittgenstein, Translation and Semiotics”. Target 1(1): 69–94. Gorlée, Dinda L. 1994. Semiotics and the Problem of Translation: With Special Reference to the Semiotics of Charles S. Peirce. Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi. Gorlée, Dinda L. 2004. On Translating Signs: Exploring Text and Semio-Translation. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. In On Translation, R. Brower (ed.), 232–239. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Kommissarov, Vilen. 1996. “Assumed Translation: Continuing the Discussion”. Target 8 (2): 365–374. Mossop, Brian. 1998. “What Is a Translating Translator Doing?”. Target 10 (2): 231–266. Nergaard, Siri. 2001. “Semiotica interpretativa e traduzione”. Athanor – Lo stesso altro XII, n.s. (4): 57–77. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931–1958. The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Edited by Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss & Arthur W. Burks. VIII vols. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press. Petrilli, Susan. 1999/2000. “Traduzione e semiosi: considerazioni introduttive”. Athanor 10 (2): 9–21. Petrilli, Susan (ed.). 2003. Translation Translation. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Proni, Giampaolo and Stecconi, Ubaldo. 1999. “Semiotics Meets Translation: A Dialogue”. Versus (82): 139–152. Pym, Anthony. 2004. The Moving Text: Localization, Translation, and Distribution. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Robinson, Douglas. 1997. “Translation and the Repayment of Debt”. Delos 7 (1–2): 10–22. Schäffner, Christina (ed.). 1999. Translation and Norms. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Short, T. L. 1986. “Life Among the Legisigns”. In Frontiers in Semiotics, J. Deely, B. Williams & F. E. Kruse (eds), 105–119. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Original edition: Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 18 (4). 1982: 285–310. Stecconi, Ubaldo. 1994. “Peirce’s Semiotics for Translation”. Koinè 4: 161–180. Stecconi, Ubaldo. 2000. “A Semiotic Analysis of the Translation-Original Relationship”. In Translationswissenschaft. Festschrift für Mary Snell-Hornby, K. Kaindl, M. Kadric and F. Pöchhacher (eds), 93–101. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.



Ubaldo Stecconi Stecconi, Ubaldo. 2001. “Un mapa de la semiótica y sus aplicaciones a los estudios de traducción”. Tonos Digital: revista electrónica de estudios filológicos (2). Available on-line at http:// www.um.es/tonosdigital/znum2/estudios/indicestudios.htm (retrieved August 25, 2006). Stecconi, Ubaldo. 2004a. “Interpretive Semiotics and Translation Theory: The Semiotic Conditions to Translation”. Semiotica 150 (1/4): 471–489. Stecconi, Ubaldo. 2004b. “A Map of Semiotics for Translation Studies”. In Similarity and Difference in Translation, S. Arduini and R. Hodgson (eds), 153–168. Modena: Guaraldi. Torop, Peeter. 2000. La traduzione totale. Translated by Bruno Osimo. Modena: Guaraldi-Logos. Original edition, Total´nyj perevod. Tartu: Izdatel’stvo Tartuskogo universiteta. 1995. Torop, Peeter. 2002. “Translation as translating as culture”. Sign Systems Studies 30 (2): 593–605. Toury, Gideon. 1986. “Translation. A Cultural-Semiotic Perspective”. In Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, T. A. Sebeok (ed.), 1111–1124. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. van Kesteren, Aloysius. 1978. “Equivalence Relationships between Source Text and Target Text: Towards a Typology on the Basis of Semiotics”. In Literature and Translation: New Perspectives in Literary Studies, J. S. Holmes, J. Lambert, R. van den Broeck, M. Janssens and A. Lefevere (eds), 48–68. Leuven: Acco.

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies A plea for widening the scope of Translation Studies Susanne Göpferich Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Austria

This paper pleads for a widening of the scope of Translation Studies to include any mediated transformation of offers of information performed to fulfil specific functions and meet the needs of specific audiences. Such a widening brings Translation Studies closer to the newly established related field of Transfer Studies (“Transferwissenschaften”). Reasons for this expansion are explained.

Keywords: translation theory, expanding the translation concept, Transfer Studies, text transformations, quality assessment

1. The aim of this article About a decade ago, Gerd Antos and Sigurd Wichter began to establish a new field of research which they termed Transfer Studies (“Transferwissenschaft”). In his programmatic article Antos (2001: 5) defines this new transdiscipline as a field of research covering all aspects of making knowledge accessible. It includes the labeling (“Etikettieren”) of knowledge, its evaluation and its functional and audience-specific transformation (Antos 2001: 22 f.). The necessity for this new field of research is derived from the problems confronting us in an information and knowledge society: the risk of drowning in a flood of information, on the one hand, and the need to continuously acquire new and more specific knowledge at shorter and shorter intervals on the other. In this article, I will compare this newly-established field of research with Translation Studies (TS), plead for a widening of the scope of TS, and show how Transfer Studies could profit from the theory, methodology, and pedagogical approaches of Translation Studies. Up to now, these aspects have not been taken into account in Transfer Studies, so that the latter, in some areas, runs the risk of reinventing the wheel. I will also show, however, that it could be of benefit to TS as well to extend its focus of interest to some



Susanne Göpferich

questions which have been tackled in Transfer Studies, especially in the fields of comprehensibility research, text optimization and popularization. Three reasons are given for this extension of focus: First, it is a logical consequence of the development TS has undergone over the last 50 years. Second, shifts involved in intralingual popularizations and text optimizations may form an indispensable component of interlingual translation within the functionalist paradigm. Third, as Hönig (1998: 49) has pointed out, translation quality assessment within the functionalist paradigm is not possible without recourse to methods of readability and comprehensibility research.

2. Transfer Studies The scope of TS has expanded continually over the last 50 years, developing in the direction of Transfer Studies. The transdiscipline of Transfer Studies was established about a decade ago when the first annual conference on this topic was organised and a series named Transferwissenschaften was started. In this short period, it has not yet developed into different branches as Translation Studies has done. For our comparison, we must bear in mind that Transfer Studies, unlike Translation Studies, is not associated with specific professional profiles, but can be considered a source of knowledge tapped by professionals in various areas. Antos (2001: 5) defines Transfer Studies as a field of research which investigates access to knowledge in the broadest sense of the term. It is “a transdisciplinary science […] whose objective is to investigate the principles, methods and strategies of making knowledge accessible in a selective and sustained way in the wake of a flood of information and knowledge explosion” (my translation). In other terms: “Transfer Studies investigates the conditions, principles, forms and strategies as well as problems and chances of creating meta-knowledge about knowledge for the purpose of making (specialized) knowledge available in an unrestricted manner to all people who might be interested in it” (Antos 2001: 5, cf. 16; my translation). To put it simply, the objective of Transfer Studies is to investigate what makes knowledge inaccessible and to eliminate the causes of this inaccessibility. These may be manifold: not knowing that a particular knowledge exists, difficulty in retrieving it, or incomprehensible presentation. These causes may again have deeper origins, such as the building of barriers so as not to have to share power, or simply the social and economic (dis)advantages involved in knowledge possession. Transfer Studies aims at the “organisational, distributional and linguistic optimization of knowledge transfer” (ibid.: 17). It deals with the labeling (“Etikettieren”) of knowledge, its evaluation (“Evaluation”) and its audience- and purpose-specific transformation (“Transformation”) – the creation of meta-knowledge about specific knowledge (ibid.: 22 f.). Antos does not expect Transfer Studies to become a new interdiscipline with its own unified theory but considers it as “an invitation to other disciplines (linguistics, media and communication studies, didactics, sociology, economics, but also philosophy and cul-

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies 

ture studies), to investigate the chances of accessing new and traditional knowledge, and the barriers which may obstruct access to it (Antos 2001: 7; my translation).

3. Widening the scope of Translation Studies as a logical consequence of its development over the last 50 years Due to the enormous development of TS, the results of our comparison between TS and Transfer Studies will differ, depending on the theoretical foundation and thus the paradigm of TS from which we start. In the sections to follow, I will refer to the equivalence-oriented paradigm, the functionalist paradigm, and the descriptive paradigm, and contrast them with Transfer Studies. I will derive what I consider to be the object of TS from the continuous expansion it has undergone during its development from the equivalence-oriented paradigm via the functionalist approach to the DTS paradigm. What then is the object of TS? This is a question translation scholars will not answer unanimously (cf. Prunč 2004). The decisive point on which they do not agree is the relationship that a text must have to its source text or source texts in order to deserve the designation translation.

3.1

From equivalence-oriented to functionalist approaches

In the opinion of translation scholars who advocate the equivalence-oriented approach, an ideal translation differs from its original in the (national) language in which it has been verbalised, but matches the original in content, style and, in some cases (e.g. Nida 1964), also in effect. This ideal is hardly ever achieved, especially since translation cannot be restricted to a linguistic transfer but also involves a cultural transfer. Even if we ignore any cultural adaptations that might be necessary there is still the problem that, in many cases, equivalence cannot be achieved on all levels to the same degree at the same time. This has led some translation scholars, such as Koller (1992: 216), to differentiate between various types of equivalence. Whenever these equivalences cannot all be achieved at the same time, the translator has to establish a hierarchy (cf. Schreiber 1993: 66 ff)1. The criterion for establishing this hierarchy, however, cannot be found in the source text itself. It can only be derived from the skopos of the translation (cf. Vermeer 1978; Reiß/Vermeer 1984; Holz-Mänttäri 1984; Hönig/Kußmaul 1984; Nord 1993; Hönig 1995, Schmitt 1999), which can be completely different from that of the source text so that it may be necessary to deviate from it on all levels and aim for zero-equivalence. (In such cases, however, the advocates of equivalence-oriented approaches would no longer speak of translation.) The function of the target text may also be identical with that of the source text (something which the advocates of equivalence-oriented approaches consider necessary), but this too may make it necessary to deviate from the source text in some respects, so that a criterion



Susanne Göpferich

is needed to determine the levels on which deviations are allowed or necessary. This insight has led to the equivalence requirement being rejected and replaced with the requirement of appropriateness for a specific audience and a specific purpose, the so-called skopos (Reiß/Vermeer 1984: 133). So far, we have not taken into consideration another decisive factor: Seeking the measure of translation quality in the source text requires that this source text should exist as such. According to constructivist comprehension theories, however, this is not the case: A text is not a text per se; it only becomes a text in the individual comprehension process of each recipient (cf. Reiß/Vermeer 1984: 58, 62, 90; Vermeer 1986: 42). As a consequence, each source text is understood in a different way by each recipient so that there are as many source texts as there are recipients and this makes equivalence impossible: equivalence to which version of the source text? This, too, is an argument in favour of functionalist approaches, which no longer look back to the source text in search of criteria for assessing translation quality but take a prospective look towards the skopos of the target text. From this functionalist perspective, the scope of TS has widened; translation theory becomes interesting for the wider scope of Transfer Studies because, in its functionalist variant, it is also applicable to text adaptations and even to text optimizations and popularizations as types of ‘intralingual translation’ (if one interprets it in an even wider sense as I will do below). Complete equivalence between different text variants cannot be achieved within the same language either and cannot be the aim of, for example, text optimizations. What can be achieved is an optimization for a specific purpose which, prior to the optimization, has to be defined. This is a requirement which many comprehensibility concepts, such as the Hamburg model of Langer/Schulz von Thun/ Tausch (1993) or Groeben’s (1982) model, do not take into account to a sufficient degree and which motivated me to develop my Karlsruhe comprehensibility concept (Göpferich 2002: 154 ff.). The Hamburg model breaks down the concept of comprehensibility into four components (called “dimensions”), which also appear in Groeben’s model: linguistic simplicity, concision, structure/layout, and motivational elements, for each of which the Hamburg model gives ideal values (on a scale from –2 to 2), which are independent of the purpose of the text. In my Karlsruhe concept the dimensions of the Hamburg model are redefined and augmented by two further dimensions, perceptibility and correctness. The features of an ‘ideal’ text in these six dimensions depend on its function, audience and sender as well as on a number of other factors, such as liability regulations, style guides, the medium in which it appears, etc. Apart from conceptual difficulties, another problem arising from equivalence-oriented approaches is that they ignore – at least in theory – those types of transfer that do not aim at equivalence and which consequently are not termed translations but adaptions, adaptations or something similar. In practice, however, the advocates of equiva-

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies

lence-oriented translation theories cannot abstain from dealing with them. Toury describes this dilemma as follows (cf. also Even-Zohar 1990: 75): [W]hen the ST-oriented theories’ practitioners are confronted with actual instances of translation, or with ‘different modes of translation,’ they fail to keep to the limits set by their a priori definitions. On the other hand, they are not willing to abandon them. Their ‘solution’ is to have their cake and eat it by means of ‘semantic games’ around the word ‘translation’ (such as ‘literal translation,’ ‘interlinear translation,’ etc.), indicating that the phenomenon designated by such an expression, though located without the realm of translation proper, also is included in it in some way and/or to some extent. (Toury 1980: 40, FN 2)

This restricted view is exactly what Mittelstraß (1998) criticizes when he demands transdisciplinarity. He starts from real-world problems and encourages all disciplines which may contribute to the solution of these problems to try and do so as well: Transdisciplinary research is research “which transgresses the boundaries of individual disciplines, which defines and solves the problems it tackles in a manner not restricted by disciplinary boundaries” (ibid. 44; my translation). For somebody who adopts this view, equivalence-oriented approaches do not make sense because their object is too idealistic and too far removed from the problems of the real world (cf. Prunč 2004: 276). Interestingly, the concept of equivalence is something Antos touches upon too, even if he does not use the term itself: Faced with knowledge explosion, it would be principally wrong to reduce knowledge transfer to the question of how existing knowledge can be ‘adapted optimally’ without structurally reducing its complexity. This would lead to the unmanageable multiplication of knowledge and contradict the logic of specialization. (Antos 2001: 22; my translation)

What he is opposed to here is the requirement of denotative equivalence. Since denotative equivalence cannot be the goal aimed at in transferring knowledge to other audiences, e.g., from specialized texts to popularised versions, he formulates alternative requirements. Among them are the principle of suitability for the audience (Antos 2001: 26) and the principle of selection: P 6: Knowledge can only be represented and transferred for a certain perspective! P 7: The principles underlying the selection of knowledge and the reduction of its complexity should be made transparent/explicit in a suitable manner! (Antos 2001: 25; italics in the original; my translation)

These are the principles with which, in the form of the skopos rule, functionalist approaches have substituted equivalence requirements. Especially with his P 7 principle, Antos introduces ethical considerations, which play a role, e.g., in the functionalist approach introduced by Nord to whom I will return below.





Susanne Göpferich

3.2

Functionalist approaches

The functionalist paradigm comprises several theory variants, whose differences are relevant for our comparison with Transfer Studies. I will take a closer look at the most important ones and their implications for Transfer Studies. 3.2.1 Vermeer’s skopos theory In his skopos theory Vermeer degrades the source text to a mere “offer of information,” about which the target text, in turn, makes an “offer of information” (Reiß/Vermeer 1984: 67, 76; my translation): “Translation is an offer of information in a target culture and its language about an offer of information from a source culture in its language.” (ibid.: 105; my translation) Considering the source text as a mere offer of information is the logical consequence of constructivist comprehension theories. What has to be emphasized here is that, for Reiß & Vermeer (1984: 19, 24, 80, 89), the applicability of the concept of translation still depends on the existence of a source text, a transfer across cultural boundaries, and a transformation which can somehow be described as “imitating,” “simulating” or “representational.” 3.2.2 Nord’s functionalist approach Christiane Nord (1993) agrees with Vermeer’s skopos theory in principle but introduces ethical considerations into it. In addition to skopos adequacy, she demands loyalty towards the source text author, the commissioner and the audience. To my mind, this is an essential additional requirement which translations (interlingual as well as intralingual ones such as e.g. popularizations of research reports) have to meet. Metainformation which does not fulfill this requirement may deceive the audience and slander the authors of the primary information (on ethical considerations cf. also Pym 1992: 151 ff.). 3.2.3 Holz-Mänttäri’s theory of translatorial action In her theory of translatorial action, Justa Holz-Mänttäri (1984) ‘dethrones’ the source text in an even more radical manner than Vermeer. To her mind, translatorial action can do without any source text at all. Therefore she avoids the term translation because it implies that there must be something that is translated. In reality, however, translators often have to fall back on a number of source documents in order to be able to produce the (complex) sign (“Botschaftsträger”) commissioned (Holz-Mänttäri 1986: 355). To Holz-Mänttäri, translatorial action is a generic term for various types of mediated intercultural communication and can even take place without any fixed source text at all. This means that she abandons Vermeer’s requirement that translation must somehow involve an “imitating” feature (cf. Nord 1998: 142). Thus, the distinction between translation as an intercultural (and in most cases, though not necessarily, also interlingual) transfer and types of intralingual adaptations of information, as they are performed in technical writing, text optimizations and

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies 

popularizations, becomes even more blurred. This is because in the case of the latter, too, there need not be any concrete source texts. Consequently, the difference between translation or translatorial action on the one hand and intralingual text transfers on the other seems to be limited to the fact that only in the case of the former do cultural barriers have to be surmounted. Even this difference, however, disappears if the concept of culture is expanded in the way that I suggest in the next section. 3.2.4 From interlingual to intralingual translation If the concept of translation covers every skopos-adequate offer of information about an offer of information from another culture, then it does not make sense – either from a theoretical, from a pedagogical or from a practice-oriented perspective – to exclude such offers of information about offers of information whose preparation does not involve surmounting a cultural barrier. Not having to surmount a cultural barrier makes the preparation of the latter type of information less complex and thus requires only some of the competences necessary for translation in the sense of Reiß & Vermeer or Nord, or for translatorial action in the sense of Holz-Mänttäri. The theory and compentences necessary for intracultural transfers as well as the pedagogical approaches to teach them are then included in those necessary for intercultural transfers. This is another reason why intralingual text transformations should not be excluded from TS. This opinion is shared, e.g., by Even-Zohar (1990) and Pym (1992: 175). EvenZohar’s (1990; 2003) concept of transfer integrates the three types of translation between which Jakobson (1966) differentiates: translation proper, intersemiotic translation, and intralingual translation. His concept of transfer, however, is much wider than the transfer concept underlying this article in that it also comprises “the process whereby imported goods are integrated into a home repertoire, and the consequences generated by this integration” (Even-Zohar 2003: 428). Pym’s transfer concept, on the other hand, comprises less than my own transfer concept. It is limited to a “material movement” (1992: 32, 129), to a “material displacement” of texts (ibid.: 131), which may make translation (including intralingual translation) necessary. The decisive feature of my transfer concept (and that of Transfer Studies), however, is to make, what is transferred, cognitively accessible in the target culture (on translation and transfer cf. also Weissbrod 2004). If one does not define the concept of culture in an ethnological sense (which Vermeer, who adopts Göhring’s (2002 [1978]: 108) definition of culture, still does) but in a way that also includes microcultures such as corporate cultures, family cultures or the cultures of scientific communities, then intralingual text transformations would be included in Reiß’ & Vermeer’s concept of translation anyway. This is a step that Schm itt (1999: 157) takes. He defines culture as comprising everything that a person should know, be able to feel and to do, in order to succeed in behaving and acting in an environment like somebody from this environment (ibid.: 157). This definition of culture implies that the adaptation of information for specialists to the needs of laypersons can be considered an intercultural transfer, because specialists and laypersons represent



Susanne Göpferich

different microcultures (cf. Pym’s [1992: 26] concept of culture, which is similar to Schmitt’s). But what about the optimization of texts, i.e., the correction and reformulation of (poor) texts with the aim of making them more skopos-adequate? By definition, text optimizations do not require the adaptation of texts to functions or audiences different from those of the original texts. The object of text optimizations are texts for a specific audience and a specific purpose which do not fulfil this function in an ideal way. The measures involved in such text optimizations, however, may not differ from those involved e.g. in popularizations, which, as we have seen, can be regarded as intercultural transfers in Schmitt’s sense and thus as translations. Therefore, to my mind, text optimizations (and thus also optimizations of translations) should not be excluded from the translation concept either. As a result, I define TS as the field of research whose object is any mediated transformation of offers of information performed to fulfil specific functions and meet the needs of specific audiences. This implies, of course, that social, political and ethical conditions, norms, problems and chances involved in this process have to be taken into account since they represent the context in which any transfer has to be seen. The term mediation plays an important role here because without it even original text productions would be included in my translation concept, which, to my mind, does not make sense (cf. Prunč 2004: 269). What my translation concept does include, however, are translations an author produces of his own works, no matter whether they involve the transfer into another language or adaptation within the same language for another audience in the same national culture. This adaptation also includes intersemiotic transformations in the Jakobsonian sense.

3.3

Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS)

Although the DTS approach focuses on literary translation, whereas Transfer Studies focuses on non-literary texts, a look at the DTS approach may be interesting for Transfer Studies as well. Toury (1995) considers any text a translation which is given this label in a culture. What interests him is not a specific pre-defined ideal equivalence relation between a source text and its translation, but, among other things, the question of what type of relationship has been established between them, what types of shifts have taken place during their translation, and what translation norms have influenced their translators. The translation concept underlying this approach which can be characterized as an empirical, non-prescriptive target-text-oriented approach comes close to the translation concept suggested in this article. One difference seems to be that in the DTS approach, which is not interested in translation pedagogy, the product is analysed retrospectively only, whereas in the functionalist approaches it is looked at both prospectively and retrospectively. In fact, approaches similar to the DTS one can also be found on an intralingual level in LSP research: Niederhauser (1999), for example, analysed the shifts that take place in the popularization of scientific texts on superconductivity. Among the most important of

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies 

these are the reduction of the amount of information, the reduction of the density of information, and the presentation of information in other contexts. Analysing such intra lingual shifts may be of value to interlingual translation as well. Krings (1986), for example, found that intralingual translations (he calls them reverbalisations), are an integral part of interlingual translation processes. They may help the translator to find an equivalent in the target language for a source-text unit for which he cannot associate a target-text equivalent spontaneously. If the analysis of such intralingual translations or reverbalisations can help us to gain deeper insights into the translation process, it does not make sense to exclude them from TS. Translation is an extremely complex process. To investigate it, it may be necessary to analytically split it up into the components which form part or may form part of it and analyze them separately, before synthesizing the results to gain insight into the complex process.2 But TS could not only profit from the analysis of intralingual transformations; Transfer Studies, especially LSP research, could profit from the methodology of TS as well. To detect the shifts in popularization, for example, Niederhauser (1999) used a product-oriented approach only. A process-oriented approach as used in TS, with TAPs and log files, can be even more revealing here (see Section 4).

4. Convergence and quality 4.1

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies compared

Now, let us contrast the discipline of TS as I define it with Transfer Studies. If one accepts my concept of translation and thus what I consider the object of Translation Studies, two of the three main tasks of Transfer Studies in the production of metaknowledge (Antos 2001: 22 f.) can be considered genuine tasks of TS as well: namely, the evaluation of knowledge (with respect to translation, this relates to its relevance to the skopos) and its function- and audience-specific transformation. It follows that in their core areas, the two disciplines are congruent. The third main task of Transfer Studies in the production of meta-knowledge, the labeling of knowledge, is gaining importance in translation management (including terminology management) as a cooperative process (cf. Risku 2004). As Risku shows in her field study, the professional profiles of persons involved in mediated intercultural specialized communication are becoming more and more diversified, and are no longer restricted to the production of target texts in a narrower sense. Rather, they include the preparation of source material, of terminology and translation memories required for target text production, the coordination of persons with different qualifications involved in target text production, etc. These tasks involve the “labeling” of knowledge. Software companies have recognized the demand for electronic support in this area and have reacted by developing translation management tools. These developments, too, bring TS closer to Transfer Studies, which, as mentioned in Section 2,



Susanne Göpferich

are not associated with specific professional profiles, but can be considered a source of knowledge needed by professionals in various areas. As a consequence, programmes in translation and interpreting have to be adapted, so that they offer (at least basic) qualifications for a multitude of professional profiles in mediated intercultural communication and options for specialization in one or more of these profiles.

4.2

Translation quality assessment in the functionalist paradigm

In Section 3, two reasons were given for widening the scope of Translation Studies: widening as a logical consequence of the development of TS and the fact that cognitive processes involved in intralingual popularizations or text optimizations may be an integral component of interlingual translation in the functionalist paradigm. There is a third reason: In 1998, Hönig criticized that the functionalist paradigm has not provided a method for translation quality assessment within this paradigm, and noted that, when it comes to translation quality assessment, “linguistic evaluation on a contrastive basis is re-integrated through the backdoor with the critic claiming that it is a typical reader’s response” (Hönig 1998: 15). He went on to say: I put great hope in the latest developments in the field of readability studies and text optimisation. […] It’s not easy to test whether one text is more readable than another one. Perhaps the fairly young discipline may eventually provide an empirical basis for what we are looking for: how can we establish, empirically, that certain texts function better than others. Such an approach would give us some kind of basis for evaluation.” (Hönig 1998: 49)

Methods which allow the researcher to obtain insights into the comprehensibility (and skopos-adequacy) of texts, whether they are inter- or intralingual translations or original texts, on an empirical basis are usability testing (Rubin 1994) for instructive texts and optimizing reverbalization using think-aloud protocols and log files for non-instructive texts (cf. Göpferich 2006). Optimizing reverbalization means that persons belonging to the target group of the text to be evaluated are asked to reverbalize the text in TRANSLOG (Jakobsen/Schou 1999) in such a way that the result is optimally comprehensible for its target group. During the experiment, the subjects have to think aloud. After the optimization process, the subjects are asked whether they have any questions for a specialist which have cropped up during the experiment and which they cannot answer using the information in the text and the TRANSLOG dictionary. Analyzing the thinkaloud protocols, log files and transcripts of the retrospective interviews not only reveals where the text is incomprehensible but also where it gives rise to misunderstandings or is hard to understand, i.e., where it is not skopos-adequate. If we start from the assumption that a discipline must comprise everything that is needed to evaluate what forms an object of this discipline, such methods from comprehensibility research, which can be regarded as intralingual translation, must not be excluded from TS.

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies 

Notes 1. Schreiber (1993), however, would object against the expansion of the concept of translation I suggest here. He differentiates between translation (“Übersetzung”) and adaptation (“Bearbeitung”) (Schreiber 1993: 125). 2. Mona Baker (2001: xvii) considers intralingual translation as an object of TS and states that it “is not such a minor issue as the existing literature on translation might suggest. Intralingual translation figures far more prominently in the Greek tradition than interlingual translation: the major preoccupation in Greece has been with translating ancient Greek texts into the modern idiom. As far as intralingual translations from one historic period for another are concerned, Baker may be right. If, however, we also consider transformations of science texts into popularized versions as intralingual translations, then a considerable number of publications can be found on this topic (e.g. Niederhauser 1999; Göpferich 1998, 2002; Liebert 2002; Drewer 2003).

References Antos, Gerd. 2001. “Transferwissenschaft. Chancen und Barrieren des Zugangs zu Wissen in Zeiten der Informationsflut und der Wissensexplosion”. In Wissenstransfer zwischen Experten und Laien. Umriss einer Transferwissenschaft, [Transferwissenschaften 1], S. Wichter and G. Antos (eds), 3–33. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Baker, Mona (ed.). 2001. “Introduction”. Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London & New York: Routledge. Drewer, Petra. 2003. Die kognitive Metapher als Werkzeug des Denkens: Zur Rolle der Analogie bei der Gewinnung und Vermittlung wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse. Tübingen: Narr. Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1990. “Translation and Transfer”. Polysystem Studies, Poetics Today 11.1: 73–78. Even-Zohar, Itamar. 2003. “Culture Repertoire and Transfer”. In Translation Translation (= Approaches to Translation Studies 21), S. Petrilli (ed.), 425–431. New York: Rodopi. Göhring, Heinz. 1978/2002. “Interkulturelle Kommunikation: Die Überwindung der Trennung von Fremdsprachen- und Landeskundeunterricht durch einen integrierten Fremdver haltensunterricht”. In Interkulturelle Kommunikation: Anregungen für Sprach- und Kulturmittler [Studien zur Translation 13], A. Kelletat and H. Siever (eds), 107–111. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. – First published 1978 in Kongreßberichte der 8. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik GAL e. V., Mainz 1977. W. Kühlwein and A. Raasch (eds), 9–14. Stuttgart: Hochschulverlag. Göpferich, Susanne. 1998. Interkulturelles Technical Writing: Fachliches adressatengerecht vermitteln. Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch. Tübingen: Narr. Göpferich, Susanne. 2002. Textproduktion im Zeitalter der Globalisierung: Entwicklung einer Didaktik des Wissenstransfers. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Göpferich, Susanne. (2006). “How Comprehensible Are Popular Science Texts? – The Use of Thinking-aloud Protocols and Log Files of Reverbalization Processes in Comprehensibility Research”. In New Trends in Specialized Discourse analysis. [Linguistic Insights: Studies in Language and Communication], M. Gotti and D. S. Giannoni (eds), 221–246. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.



Susanne Göpferich Groeben, Norbert. 1982. Leserpsychologie: Textverständnis – Textverständlichkeit. Münster: Aschendorff. Hönig, Hans G. 1995. Konstruktives Übersetzen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Hönig, Hans G. 1998. “Positions, Power and Practice: Functionalist Approaches and Translation Quality Assessment”. In Translation and Quality, C. Schäffner (ed.), 6–34. Clevedon (UK): Multilingual Matters. Hönig, Hans G. and Kußmaul, Paul. 1984. Strategie der Übersetzung. Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch. Tübingen: Narr. Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1984. Translatorisches Handeln – Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia. Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. 1986. “Translatorisches Handeln – theoretisch fundierte Berufsprofile”. In Übersetzungswissenschaft – eine Neuorientierung, M. Snell-Hornby (ed.), 348–374. Tübingen: Francke. Jakobsen, Arnt L. and Schou, Lasse. 1999. “Translog documentation”. In Probing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results, G. Hansen (ed.), 151–186. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Jakobson, Roman. 1966. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. In On Translation, R. Brower (ed.), 232–238. New York: Oxford University Press. Koller, Werner. 1992. Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. Heidelberg, Wiesbaden: Quelle & Meyer. Krings, Hans P. 1986. Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht: Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern. Tübingen: Narr. Langer, Inghard, Schulz von Thun, Friedemann and Tausch, Reinhard. 1993. Sich verständlich ausdrücken. München & Basel: Ernst Reinhardt. Liebert, Wolf-Andreas. 2002. Wissenstransformationen: Handlungssemantische Analysen von Wissenschafts- und Vermittlungstexten. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter. Mittelstraß, Jürgen. 1998. Die Häuser des Wissens. Wissenschaftstheoretische Studien. Frankfurt/ M.: Suhrkamp. Nida, Eugene. 1964. Toward a Science of Translating: With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures involved in Bible Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Niederhauser, Jürg. 1999. Wissenschaftssprache und populärwissenschaftliche Vermittlung. Tübingen: Narr. Nord, Christiane. 1993. Einführung in das funktionale Übersetzen – am Beispiel von Titeln und Überschriften. Tübingen, Basel: Francke. Nord, Christiane. 1998. “Das Verhältnis des Zieltexts zum Ausgangstext“. In Handbuch Translation, M. Snell-Hornby, H. G. Hönig, P. Kussmaul and P.A. Schmitt (eds), 141–144. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Prunč, Erich. 2004. “Zum Objektbereich der Translationswissenschaft.” In Und sie bewegt sich doch … Translationswissenschaft in Ost und West. Festschrift für Heidemarie Salevsky zum 60. Geburtstag, I. Müller (ed.), 263–285. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, Pym, Anthony. 1992. Translation and Text Transfer. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Reiß, Katharina and Vermeer, Hans J. 1984. Grundlegung einer allgemeinen Translationstheorie. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Risku, Hanna. 2004. Translationsmanagement: Interkulturelle Fachkommunikation im Informationszeitalter. Tübingen: Narr. Rubin, Jeffrey. 1994. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests. New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.

Translation Studies and Transfer Studies 

Schmitt, Peter A. 1999. Translation und Technik. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Schreiber, Michael. 1993. Übersetzung und Bearbeitung: Zur Differenzierung und Abgrenzung des Übersetzungsbegriffs. Tübingen: Narr. Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: Porter Institute. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Vermeer, Hans J. 1978: “Ein Rahmen für eine allgemeine Translationstheorie”. Lebende Sprachen 3: 99–102. Vermeer, Hans J. 1986. “Übersetzen als kultureller Transfer.” In Übersetzungswissenschaft – eine Neuorientierung, M. Snell-Hornby (ed), 30–53. Tübingen: Francke. Weissbrod, Rachel. 2004. “From Translation to Transfer”. Across Languages and Cultures 5.1.: 23–41.

Modelling translator’s competence Relevance and expertise under scrutiny Fabio Alves Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil José Luiz Gonçalves Federal University of Ouro Preto, Brazil

Building on Relevance Theory (Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995) and connectionist principles (Elman et al. 1996), this paper presents the rationale and assesses the plausibility of a dynamic cognitive model of translator’s competence proposed by Gonçalves (2003). It differentiates between a specific and a general translator’s competence, supports the amalgamation of procedural and declarative knowledge as constitutive instances of translation competence, and argues for an increment of awareness-raising, meta-cognitive processes to develop this kind of competence. Translator’s competence is, therefore, considered to be a particular cognitive configuration that allows translators to establish a balance between the periphery and the central layers of cognitive systems and, from a situated perspective, enables them to attain an inferentially driven interpretive resemblance between source and target texts.

Keywords: translator’s competence, Relevance Theory, interpretive resemblance, cognitive modelling, connectionism

1. Introduction The definition of translation competence has been a long-sought goal in the field of Translation Studies. In the sub-area of translation process research, Krings (1986), Gerloff (1987, 1988), Séguinot (1989), Tirkkonen-Condit (1990, 1992), Jääskeläinen (1990, 1996), Alves (1995), Danks (1997) and Schäffner & Adab (2000), among others, have approached the subject without ever reaching a consensus on the scope of this compe-



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

tence and the methods to investigate it. In this paper, we propose a theoretical model of translator’s competence and draw on evidence from four exploratory studies previously carried out (Alves & Gonçalves 2003, Alves & Magalhães 2004, Alves 2005a and 2005b) to corroborate it. The proposal builds on PACTE’s model of translation competence (PACTE 2003) but explores a different perspective which we call translator’s competence (Rothe-Neves 2002, Gonçalves 2003). Unlike PACTE, we focus on a representation which attempts to map inferential aspects of the translator’s cognitive behaviour and portrays different stages in the process of acquiring translation competence. Building on Anderson’s (1983) distinction between procedural and declarative knowledge, PACTE (2003) and Hurtado Albir (2005) define translation competence mainly as a type of procedural knowledge, that is, knowing how, rather than a type of declarative knowledge, that is, knowing what (or knowing that). On the other hand, authors like Alves et al. (2000) and Schäffner & Adab (2000) argue that awareness of the declarative knowledge involved in translation may help translators improve their performance. In short, they postulate that knowing what (or knowing that) is an important component of translator’s competence and that it may therefore play a relevant role in the development of that competence since this type of knowledge is expected to increase the translator’s conscious monitoring of those processes and, eventually, to have an impact on translated texts. We assume that the positions above are complementary rather than contradictory. Throughout this paper, we present the rationale of a model of translator’s competence that builds on theoretical presuppositions of Relevance Theory (Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995) and connectionist principles (Elman et al. 1996). We also assess a model that incorporates the dynamics of inferential processing as a basis for problem-solving and decision-making in translation (cf. Alves & Gonçalves 2003, Gonçalves 2003). Finally, from a cognitively situated perspective, we aim to show how aspects of inferential processing in the performance of novice and expert translators can be depicted in terms of their specific dynamics.

2. In search of a model Considering the complexity involved in translation, it can be assumed that there are different kinds and degrees of cognitive processes taking place alongside a translation task, some drawing on procedural knowledge, some relying on declarative knowledge and some related to more or less conscious cognitive sub-systems. Incorporating these different processes, Gonçalves (2003) proposed a cognitive model of translator’s competence building on the principles of Relevance Theory (Sperber & Wilson 1986/1995) and connectionist approaches to cognition (Elman et al. 1996). Although these frameworks depart from different conceptions of cognition – that is, modularity versus parallel processing – they both present a dynamic conception of cognition and biological development that can be complementarily applied to language, translation, and social-interaction.

Modelling translator’s competence 

Based on the above-mentioned frameworks, Gonçalves (2003) carried out an exploratory study through which he located two domains of translator’s competence expressed through the following theoretical principles: – Translator’s competence is a complex super-competence, which demands the coordination of various cognitive domains; – There is a specific, core domain for translator’s competence, which is guided by the Principle of Relevance (Sperber & Wilson, 1986/1995), in coordination with other sub-competences, working mainly through conscious or meta-cognitive processes. To corroborate the first principle, Gonçalves built on Alves et al. (2000) for a definition of a general super-competence in translation. This highlights the complex dimension of translating and is therefore called general translator’s competence, that is, “all knowledge, abilities, and strategies a successful translator masters and which lead to an adequate performance of translation tasks” (Alves et al. 2000: 13). For the explicitation of the second principle, i.e., a core domain for translator’s competence called specific translator’s competence, Gonçalves (2003) drew on Relevance Theory concepts, some of them developed by Gutt (2000) and Alves (1995, 1996). Thus, this specific translator’s competence (STC henceforth) is directly proportional to the production of contextual effects generated from two counterpart translation units (one in the source language and the other in the target language) and is also directly proportional to the overlapping of the two sets of effects, that is, the maximisation of their interpretive resemblance.

3. Theoretical underpinnings In order to clarify Gonçalves’s definition of STC, it is necessary to review some concepts of Relevance Theory. According to Sperber and Wilson, human cognition develops by gradually and progressively adding and modifying mental representations in an individual’s cognitive environment. Following this view, both cognition and memory are considered to be highly dynamic phenomena which generate the mental representations used by an individual in his/her processes of meaning construction. Relevance Theory envisages two types of use for mental representations – descriptive and interpretive. Each of these refers to a corresponding type of resemblance. Descriptive resemblance establishes a correlation between an object or state of affairs in the world and a mental representation, while interpretive resemblance does this between two mental representations. According to Relevance Theory, translation is a case of interpretive resemblance between two counterpart translation units (henceforth TUs) situated, respectively, in a source and in a target language. Within the translator’s inferential context each TU is assumed to generate a number of contextual effects under the influence of the Principle of Relevance. Contextual effects are the result of inferential processing implemented by an individual along communicative interactions or infor-



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

mation processing in which both new and given pieces of information are put together in order to improve his/her cognitive environment. The Principle of Relevance, in turn, is responsible for regulating the search for the highest possible cognitive effects with the least necessary cognitive effort. This principle allows for the continuous improvements of our mental coherence network, that is, our knowledge or encyclopaedic memory. Figure 1 below is intended to summarise the relevant aspects of STC.

Translator’s cognitive environment

Inferential Processes (Principle of Relevance) SL-TU ST

TL-TU

The progressive and recursive generation of contextual effects from two counterpart TUs and search for an optimal overlapping between the two sets of effects = maximization of interpretive resemblance between the two counterpart TUs TT

(ST = source text; SL = source language; TL = target language; TT = target text)

Figure 1. Specific translator’s competence (STC) based on Relevance Theory.

Within the Relevance Theory framework, we see translation as a progressive and recursive search for interpretive resemblance between two counterpart TUs. More specifically, translating, from a cognitive perspective, implies the progressive and recursive generation of contextual effects from two counterpart TUs and the search for an optimal overlapping between these two sets of effects. From a connectionist perspective, the dynamics of the search for optimal interpretive resemblance, namely, the optimisation of a relation between cognitive effort and contextual effects, falls within the scope of the following tenets (Elman et al. 1996): – A fundamental tenet in connectionism is that cognition is seen not only as an internal mechanism developed by a genetic programme, but also as a result of external stimuli, what include social interactions experienced by the individual. – Parallel processing is an important feature of cognitive systems – a certain level of modularity (serial processing) is not the cause but a possible result of stabilising long-term recursive processes in cognitive development. – Connectionist systems present a minimalist architecture – they are basically made of processing units and connections, a system that is relatively analogous to the human nervous system (neurons and synapses). – Connectionist networks are conceived of to enable certain learning abilities or a primitive kind of intelligent behaviour – according to the stimuli received, a neural network can re-calibrate its connection weights in order to approximate its responses to a certain external pattern.

Modelling translator’s competence 

– Memory is conceived of as a plastic and dynamic device – actually, it is an ongoing process, much more an effect of the very functioning of the network than a stable/ steady localised representation for external phenomena and objects. Relying on these tenets, the general translator’s competence (GTC henceforth) is considered to embody, from a situated perspective, emergent principles responsible for cognitive development. Similar to a fully-recurrent connectionist network, GTC is the result of an increment in competence levels generated by the gradual increase of comprehensible input stemming from existing cognitive systems. On the basis of this incremental change, it is possible to conceive of neural networks that are able to deal with problems related to the pragmatic contextualisation of relevant information for translation purposes. To illustrate the situatedness of GTC, Figure 2 presents a model for representing cognitive development through the sequence below. 2A

2B

2C

2E

2F

2G

2D

Social-interaction Perception/motor processes Procedural knowledge Declarative knowledge Propositional attitude (self-awareness) Meta-cognition

Figure 2. The development of cognition based on connectionist principles.

Building on Elman et al (1996), we present the above sequence of figures as a representation of stages of cognitive development which go from the early embryo, in a precognitive stage (2A), to the adult cognitive maturation of complex multi-purpose, highly interconnected systems (2G). Basically, what we intend to represent here is a gradual, systematic, recursive process of widening network connections among various units in the individual’s cognitive environment. Based on evidence found in Gonçalves (2003), it is our assumption that the individual’s profile will determine whether cognition will be situated more towards the periphery or more towards the centre of the system. Differences in the levels of expertise and of experience will account for the fact that some translators’ cognitive processes tend to gravitate more towards the periphery of the cognitive system – remaining therefore under the influence



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

of automatic processes – while other translators are able to integrate the periphery with central parts of the cognitive system in an attempt to create a situated perspective for their cognitive functioning. Incorporating some of the sub-competences conceived of by PACTE (2003) – namely, the bilingual, extra-linguistic, instrumental, knowledge-about-translation, and strategic sub-competences coupled with psycho-physiological components – we are now in a position to combine Figure 1, which draws on Relevance Theory, with Figure 2, which builds on connectionist principles, and suggest the following model for translator’s competence, integrating STC and some of the sub-competences postulated by PACTE (2003).

ST

TT SL

TL

INST SL TU

TL TU

KAT

PP

Cross-linguistic Pragmatic Competence = Specific Translator’s Competence (Search for optimal interpretive resemblance between two counterpart TUs)

(ST = source text; SL = source language; SLTU = source- language translation unit; TLTU = target-language translation unit; TL = target language; TT = target text; KAT = knowledge about translation; PP = psycho-physiological components; INST = instrumental sub-competence)

Figure 3. Cognitive modelling of translator’s competence.

In line with the two theoretical principles proposed by Gonçalves (2003), STC is the core of a super-competence, which is expected to coordinate a set of different subcompetences, operating mainly through conscious or meta-cognitive processes. Therefore, STC is situated in the more conscious layers of the system, ranging from levels of higher procedural knowledge to meta-cognition. However, the translator needs to rely on other cognitive systems in order to make the complex transformation from source into target text possible. Proficiency in both working languages is a pre-requisite. They are represented here in the outermost layers of the figure including the darkest outer layer outside cognition, where the social-interactive environment is situated. The representation of language proficiency at this level is due to the fact that language proper is mostly automated and “proceduralised” but, at the same time, not only a cognitive phenomenon but also a social-interactive one. We consider the set formed by source and target languages in conjunction with STC to be the main cognitive set of translator’s competence since it is expected to func-

Modelling translator’s competence 

tion more intensively during the act of translating. Besides this main set, we assume that there are some auxiliary sub-competences that contribute to the improvement of STC. This auxiliary set consists of three sub-systems borrowed and adapted from the model developed by PACTE (2003). It includes an instrumental sub-competence (INST henceforth) that, from our point of view, reflects the ability to use reference tools and to deal with several different external demands while carrying out a translation task. Being mainly procedural, it is also related to the concept of external support proposed by Alves (1995) and can be acquired procedurally and/or declaratively. It helps translators with the search for references and also by placing constraints on STC on how to build up inferential contexts. The other auxiliary sub-competence borrowed from PACTE is knowledge-about-translation (henceforth KAT). It is mainly a declarative type of knowledge and is mostly learned explicitly and/or theoretically. It helps translators gear STC towards what they believe to be the most appropriate direction for the task being performed. The last auxiliary sub-system also borrowed from PACTE is formed by psycho-physiological components (henceforth PP). These include both subjective/emotional and physiological/motor aspects involved in translating and constitute an important interface between body regulation and subjective consciousness which, in translating, can be related to typing skills, postural and ergonomic behaviour, emotional balance and control under psychological stress, internal motivation etc. Despite being peripheral and less influential, the management of these aspects can either maximize or minimize cognitive resources that, in principle, should mostly be concentrated on the processes taking place in the specific competence system. Therefore, PP must also be taken into account in the study of translator’s competence. PACTE’s strategic sub-competence is not incorporated in our model because we assume its role is included within that of STC but does not entirely overlap with it. While both are assigned the role of integrating the other sub-competences, STC, unlike PACTE’s strategic sub-competence, contributes to inferences in order to enable problem-solving and decision-making processes to take place. Finally, we understand that PACTE’s extralinguistic sub-competence can include any type of knowledge other than knowledge of the languages involved, be it either declarative or procedural. Therefore, it falls outside the scope of our model to represent it in a specific sub-system since it may include any piece of information related to any type of procedural or declarative knowledge. Hurtado Albir (2005) points out that the acquisition of translation competence from the perspective of PACTE’s model is to be considered a process of restructuring and development of novice knowledge which evolves from a stage of pre-translation competence – including here the capacity of bilinguals to translate – and goes gradually through the stages of novice, advanced, competent, proficient and expert translators (cf. Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1986 and Chesterman, 1997) – to become a form of specialized knowledge. For us, these stages of restructuring and development are in line with a connectionist view of cognitive development in which acquisition of knowledge occurs gradually resulting in more complex processes as learning matures.



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

As such, and as explained above, the dynamic model of translator’s competence proposed by Gonçalves (2003) can be considered to embody the different aspects of GTC and STC which vary cognitively and operationally depending on the level of expertise and experience of the individual translator. Therefore, competence is not considered to be an existing component in the translator’s mind but, rather, is seen as a particular cognitive configuration that develops gradually on the basis of the internal and external dynamics experienced by the translator. We assume that the achievement of STC will be higher at the expert end of the scale and that expert translators will draw more heavily on meta-cognitive processing, thus making more conscious decisions and qualitatively increasing the management of the cognitive resources available in the process of translation. On the other hand, lower levels of STC will situate the translator at the novice end of the scale. As corroborated in the literature (Jääskeläinen 1989, Tirkkonen-Condit 1990, Alves 1995 and Lorenzo 1999, among others), novice translators draw more intensively on automatic processes, thus making fewer conscious decisions and qualitatively decreasing the management of the cognitive resources available in the process of translation. The qualitative increment of meta-cognitive processes will, therefore, constitute a meaningful differential aspect in translator’s competence. It seems relevant to stress that the present discussion focuses solely on the process of translation. As far as the interface with the process of interpretation is concerned, Gile (1995) postulated a Gravitational Model which, in our view, shares some traits with the model proposed by Gonçalves (2003). The role of centrifugal and centripetal forces converging or diverging from the centre of the two models can be said to be analogous with the functioning of connectionist networks. Given the interface between the competences required from translators and interpreters, it appears to us that Gile’s and Gonçalves’s models, taken together, can foster a dialogue focused on the similarities and differences between modes of processing in translation and interpretation.

4. Assessing the model In order to assess the model presented in Figure 3, four exploratory studies will be discussed in this section. All four followed a triangulation approach (Alves 2003) to the analysis of translation process data, obtained through Translog (Jakobsen & Schou 1999) and retrospective protocols (Ericsson & Simon 1984/1993). Although source texts, language pairs, and expertise levels differed in these four exploratory studies, they all aimed at investigating the interrelationships between the cognitive processing of linguistic and contextual aspects in translation. In Alves & Gonçalves (2003) we combined a process-oriented approach to translation with an analysis, based on Relevance Theory, of the performance of four novice translators working from English into Brazilian Portuguese in order to investigate the subjects’ ability to deal with the distinction between procedural and conceptual encoding.

Modelling translator’s competence 

We formulated two hypotheses to be tested by means of Relevance Theory assumptions. It was our assumption that, on the basis of the degree of explicitness in a given TU, there would be fewer problems in the recognition of the procedurally encoded information in the source text and that similar inferential processing would be observed among the subjects. Along the same theoretical framework, we postulated that, due to the level of implicitness in a given TU, conceptually encoded information would be handled on the basis of individually available contextual assumptions. Solutions would therefore be inferentially supported by contextual assumptions derived from the translators’ cognitive environments and would vary randomly among subjects. In other words, translation decisions would be more contextually oriented. Process data was collected and then analysed by means of triangulating Translog representation files and retrospective protocols recorded with the aid of Translog’s replay function immediately after the translations were finished. The source text in Alves and Gonçalves (2003) described three phases in the life of Osama bin Laden: as a young millionaire living in Saudi Arabia, as a terrorist living in Sudan, and as a fugitive living in the caves in Afghanistan. It dealt with the search for bin Laden after the events of 11 September 2001, and could allow for different readings based on different ideological standpoints. Our analysis showed that translators’ cognitive processes were constrained by the limits of their ability to retrieve contextual cues conveyed by procedurally encoded information as well as by their difficulties in dealing coherently with conceptually encoded information. The analysis also indicated that the emotional impact of the events led the subjects to rely less on contextual cues and to draw on noncontextual ones to account for representations they built into their translated texts. With regard to the model illustrated in Figure 3, the data analysis reveals that the performance of the four novice translators tended to gravitate more towards the periphery of their cognitive systems, signaling more automatic work, difficulties in processing contextually embedded information, and lack of meta-cognition to generate contextual effects. Using the same source text and a similar methodology, Alves & Magalhães (2004) carried out an exploratory study with another group of 17 novice translators. The authors focused on the concept of cognitive rhythm (Schilperoord 1996), namely rhythmical patterns found in the alternation between pauses and text production. They also correlated the mapping of cognitive rhythms with the degree of durability (Alves 2005a) in the performance of translators, an outcome of a particular performance that signals a pattern of processing and monitoring text production assumed to be correlated with efficient cognitive management and reflective practice from a meta-cognitive perspective. (Durability is a cognitive pattern that can be observed in the translation process of expert translators. It can be mapped onto and assessed through the juxtaposition of features of expert performance, such as time spent on a task, degree of meta-cognitive monitoring and reliable task output, particularly at the end of the drafting phase). As an extension of this concept, target texts can therefore be said to be more or less durable. By means of a triangulation of process- and product-driven data, Alves & Magalhães (2004) found cognitive rhythms of novice translators to be erratic,



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

with no consistent pattern within the sample, and levels of critical language awareness to be lower, thus leading to the production of less durable target texts. Alves & Maga lhães (2004) also observed that there was no correlation between the subjects’ cognitive rhythms and the type of target text they produced. The emergence of distinct cognitive rhythms among novice translators is, in itself, no evidence of qualitatively distinct translation products. Strict linear processing and the lack of adequate cognitive management and critical language awareness seem to hinder novice translators from making effective improvements on their target texts and arriving at more stable, more durable target texts. Such processing inadequacies seem to indicate that novice translators do need some guidance in order to improve their cognitive management levels on the basis of a meta-cognitive monitoring of their own processes. Corroborating evidence found in the literature (Jääskeläinen 1989, Tirkkonen-Condit 1990, Alves 1995, Lorenzo 1999, among others), the results also show that novice translators seem to operate on the basis of mere encoding and decoding processes and have difficulties in establishing a link between their work and the contexts out of and into which they translate. Again, akin to what we found for the subjects in Alves & Gonçalves (2003), the novice translators in Alves & Magalhães (2004) shared a representation similar to that shown in Figure 4 below. Building on Jakobsen (2002), Alves (2005a) carried out another study involving a novice and two expert translators in order to discuss the issue of durability and to examine the interrelationships between cognitive rhythm, meta-cognition and experience as parameters of expertise in translation. The results corroborated the findings of Alves & Gonçalves (2003) and Alves & Magalhães (2004) and showed that lower levels of meta-cognition and lack of experience in translation accounted for the emergence of erratic cognitive rhythms and, ultimately, for the production of less durable translated texts among novice translators. Finally, in a study aimed at assessing the relationship between cognitive effort and contextual effects, Alves (2005b) compared the performance of two novice and two expert translators translating the same source text from English into Brazilian Portuguese and Iberian Spanish. Again, the performance of the novice translators corroborated the findings of previous studies and illustrated a cognitive profile that we have decided to call a narrow-band translator. This narrow-band translator works mostly on the basis of insufficiently contextualised cues (for instance, dictionary-based meaning of words instead of contextualised meaning) and fails to bridge the gap between procedurally, conceptually and contextually encoded information. A representation of the prototype of a novice, narrow-band translator is portrayed in Figure 4 below. In Figure 4 the components of the model are expanded to illustrate possible interfaces between the different layers in the performance of novice translators. There is a very strong overlap between the two working languages, with source and target languages mutually affecting one another and, most importantly, STC seems to be far removed from meta-cognition and is connected only to the structural features of language and text production. While translating in this fashion, novice translators are

Modelling translator’s competence

likely to have difficulties in determining at which level a TU should be processed in order to generate strong contextual effects and a maximised interpretive resemblance.

ST

TT SL

TL TL TU

SL TU

INST

KAT

PP

Disconnected sub-competences; Interpretive resemblance limited to lower level inferences (mostly linguistic-oriented); Considerable interference between SL and TL; Relatively lower level of proficiency in SL

Figure 4. The Narrow-Band Translator.

A rather different picture emerges when contrasting the results observed in the performance of novice translators with that of their expert counterparts. The findings of Alves (2005a and 2005b) reveal that the higher the levels of meta-cognition, the greater the balance between cognitive effort and contextual effects in translation. The expert translators in both studies demonstrated an ability to coordinate the different demands of the translation tasks. The data analysis in both studies showed that expert translators seem to integrate the periphery with the central parts of their cognitive systems in an attempt to create a situated perspective for their cognitive functioning. Through their retrospective protocols, it could be observed that contextually embedded information and meta-cognition drove their problem-solving and decision-making processes. A striking feature observed in the retrospective verbalisations of expert translators is their reliance on themselves in passing judgement on their own decision-making processes. Whereas novice translators tend to be rather insecure when it comes to decision-making, expert translators are more daring and ready to take responsibility for the changes they implement in the target texts. This type of behaviour is illustrative of a cognitive profile that we call a broadband translator. These broadband translators tend to work mostly on the basis of communicative cues provided by the source text and reinforced by the contextual assumptions derived from their cognitive environments. This kind of cognitive behaviour enables them to integrate procedurally, conceptually and contextually encoded information into a coherent whole. A representation of the prototype of an expert, broadband translator is portrayed in Figure 5 below.





Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves

ST

TT SL

INST KAT

TL

SL TU

TL TU

PP

Ability to appropriately grade interpretive resemblance from micro-linguistic to meta-contextual resemblance

Figure 5. The Broadband Translator.

In Figure 5 the components of the model are expanded to illustrate possible interfaces between the different layers of the system and the emergence of translator’s competence from a meta-cognitive perspective. There is very little interference between the two working languages and, most importantly, STC expands to encompass higher levels of meta-cognition and is connected to all the other relevant cognitive systems. Particularly related to the development of this core competence is the ability to appropriately grade interpretive resemblance from micro-linguistic to meta-contextual levels. In this respect, an expert translator is able to move back and forth between the periphery and the centre of the system to decide at which level of contextual effects a given TU is to be processed. However, one should bear in mind that translator’s competence may prove more or less advanced according to different degrees of experience in particular knowledge domains. Depending on the demands and specificities of a translation task, cognitive changes may affect the performance of an expert translator, rendering certain tasks more challenging and effortful than others. This explains why an expert translator who may excel in terms of cognitive behaviour when translating under certain circumstances may show a radically different kind of behaviour when confronted with task constraints s/he is not familiar with. Through Figures 3, 4 and 5, we expect to have made it clear that, from a cognitively situated perspective, the performance of both novice and expert translators can be portrayed within a model that captures their specific dynamics. Likewise, the performance of an individual translator can also be portrayed differently in the model depending on the cognitive traits of his/her performance.

Modelling translator’s competence 

5. Final remarks In connectionist and Relevance Theory terms, the picture emerging from our observations of the performance of novice and expert translators is multifaceted. It suggests that translator’s competence consists of a set of cognitive behaviours grouped around a cline that goes from the mere transfer of linguistically encoded items to the point where the translator fully integrates a more complex body of sub-competences and is willing to take conscious responsibility for his/her decisions. In this respect, one may say that narrow-band and broadband translators share potential cognitive characteristics. However, one observes changes of degree and kind in the levels of translator’s competence as this competence develops and matures and procedural and declarative knowledge about translation become forms of specialised knowledge. By means of Figures 3, 4 and 5, we intend to show that translator’s competence should be considered a particular cognitive configuration that allows translators to establish a balance between the periphery and the central layers of cognitive systems and, from a situated perspective, enables them to arrive at an inferentially driven interpretive resemblance between source and target texts.

References Alves, Fabio. 1995. Zwischen Schweigen und Sprechen: Wie bildet sich eine transkulturelle Brücke?: eine psycholinguistisch orientierte Untersuchung von Übersetzungsvorgängen zwischen portugiesischen und brasilianischen Übersetzern. Hamburg: Dr. Kovac. Alves, Fabio. 1996. “Lançando anzóis: uma análise cognitiva de processos mentais em tradução”. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem 2 (4): 77–90. Alves, Fabio. 2005a. “Ritmo cognitivo, meta-reflexão e experiência: parâmetros de análise processual no desempenho de tradutores novatos e experientes”. In Competência em tradução: Cognição e discurso, A. Pagano, C. Magalhães and F. Alves (eds), 90–122. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG. Alves, Fabio. 2005b. “Esforço cognitivo e efeito contextual em tradução: relevância no desempenho de tradutores novatos e expertos”. Linguagem em (Dis)curso 5: 11–31. Alves, Fabio and Gonçalves, José L. 2003. “A relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation”. In Triangulating translation: perspectives in process oriented research [Benjamins Translation Library 45], F. Alves (ed.), 11–34. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Alves, Fabio and Magalhães, Célia. 2004. “Using small corpora to tap and map the process-product interface in translation”. TradTerm 10: 179–211. Alves, Fabio, Magalhães, Célia and Pagano, Adriana. 2000. Traduzir com autonomia: estratégias para o tradutor em formação. São Paulo: Contexto. Anderson, John R. 1983. The architecture of cognition, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chesterman, Andrew. 1997. Memes of translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Danks, Joseph H., Shreve, Gregory M., Fountain, Stephen B. and McBeath, Michael K. (eds). 1997. Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting. California: Sage Publications.



Fabio Alves and José Luiz Gonçalves Dreyfus, Hubert L. and Dreyfus, Stuart E. 1986. Mind over machine. The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. Oxford: Blackwell. Elman, Jeffrey L., Bates, Elizabeth A., Johnson, Mark H., Karmiloff-Smith, Annette, Parisi, Domenico and Plunkett, Kim. 1996. Rethinking innateness: a connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge: MIT Press. Ericsson, K. Anders and Simon, Herbert A. 1984, 2nd edition 1993. Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. Cambridge: MIT Press. Gerloff, Pamela. 1987. “Identifying the unit of analysis in translation: some uses of think aloud protocol data”. In Instrospection in second language research, C. Faerch and G. Kasper (eds), 135–158. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. Gerloff, Pamela. 1988. From French to English: a look at the translation process in students, bilinguals, and professional translators. Cambridge: Harvard University (unpublished PhD thesis). Gile, Daniel. 1995. Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gonçalves, José L. 2003. O desenvolvimento da competência do tradutor: investigando o processo através de um estudo exploratório-experimental. [The development of translator’s competence: investigating the process through an exploratory-experimental study]. Belo Horizonte: FALE/ UFMG (unpublished PhD thesis). Gutt, Ernst-August. 2000. Translation and relevance: cognition and context. Manchester: St. Jerome. Hurtado Albir, Amparo. 2005. “A aquisição da competência tradutória. Aspectos teóricos e metodológicos”. In Competência em tradução. Cognição e discurso, A. Pagano, C. Magalhães and F. Alves (eds), 10–42. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG. Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1989. “Translation assignment in professional vs. non-professional translation: a think-aloud protocol study”. In The translation process, C. Séguinot (ed.), 87–98. Toronto: H.G. Publications. York University. Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1990. Features of successful translation processes: A Think-Aloud Protocol Study. University of Joensuu (unpublished PhD thesis). Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1996. “Hard work will bear beautiful fruit. A Comparison of Two ThinkAloud Protocols”. Meta, 46 (1): 60–74. Jakobsen, Arnt L. 2002. “Orientation, segmentation, and revision in translation”. In Empirical Translation Studies: process and product, G. Hansen (ed.), 191–204. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Jakobsen, Arnt L. and Schou, Lasse. 1999. “Translog documentation”. In Probing the Process of Translation. Methods and Results, G. Hansen (ed.), 1–36. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Krings, Hans P. 1986. Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht. Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern. Tübingen: Narr. Lorenzo, Maria P. 1999. “La seguridad del traductor profesional en la traducción a una lengua extranjera”. In Probing the process of translation. methods and results, G. Hansen (ed.), 121– 134. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. PACTE. 2003. “Building a Translation Competence Model”. In Triangulating Translation: perspectives in process oriented research, F. Alves (ed.), 43–66. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Rothe-Neves, Rui. 2002. Características cognitivas e desempenho em tradução: investigação em tempo real. Belo Horizonte: Federal University of Minas Gerais (unpublished PhD thesis). Schäffner, Christina and Adab, Beverly (eds). 2000. Developing translation competence. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Modelling translator’s competence 

Schilperoord, Joost. 1996. It’s about time: temporal aspects of cognitive processes in text production. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Séguinot, Candace. 1989. The translation process. Toronto: HG Publications. Sperber, Dan and Wilson, Deirdre. 1986, 2nd edition 1995. Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 1990. “Professional vs. non-professional translation: a think-aloud protocol study”. In Learning, Keeping and using language, M. A. K. Halliday, J. Gibbons and H. Nicholas (eds), 381–394. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 1992. “The interaction of world knowledge and linguistic knowledge in the process of translation: a think-aloud protocol study”. In Translation and meaning, Part 2, B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk and M. Thelen (eds), 433–440. Maastricht: Euroterm.

part 2

Methodology

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal Teresa Seruya1, Marta Teixeira Anacleto2, Maria dos Anjos Guincho3, Dionísio Martínez Soler4, Maria Lin Moniz5, Alexandra Lopes6 University of Lisbon, Portugal, Centro de Literatura e Cultura Portuguesa e

1

Brasileira (CLCPB), 2University of Coimbra; CLCPB, 3Catholic University of Portugal; CLCPB, 4Vigo Official Language School, Spain; CLCPB, 5Palmela Secondary School; CLCPB, 6Catholic University of Portugal; CLCPB

This paper is both a shortened version of a provisional account of a research project entitled “Literary Histories and Translations. Representations of

the Other in Portuguese Culture” and an attempt at describing briefly the past and future of literary translation studies in Portugal. Therefore, it will provide an overview of the efforts to identify and study the work of literary translators over the centuries in Portugal, and offer an outline of what remains to be done. [T]ranslators both ground a culture in their role as architects of vernacular languages and cultures and they creatively undermine and challenge these very cultures and their capacity as underground agents. (Michael Cronin, Translation and Globalisation, 2003)

Keywords: agents, cultural studies, literary translation, reception studies, Translation Studies

 T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes

1. Preliminary remarks Despite being a popular syllabus in institutions of higher education nowadays, Translation Studies remains to a large extent a matter of blueprints, in the sense of plans to build a discipline, and of underground agencies, since most of the work is individual (therefore, potentially less visible), and generally taking place within the realm of more institutional disciplines, be it Culture or Literary Studies or Comparative Literature or Linguistics. Looking back and trying to assess what has been done is no simple task. Most such endeavours are articles and essays published in academic journals and reviews from different disciplines or have resulted in unpublished MA and PhD theses. This paper is therefore an attempt to recover (and uncover) the work being done in the particular area of literary translation history. It neither aims to nor would it be able to describe every effort in Translation Studies research in Portugal, interesting and, perhaps, necessary as that might be.1

2. The age of innocence: Beginnings, questions and other transgressions In 1998, an article entitled “Where are we in Translation Studies?” was published in an anthology of texts on translation (Lefevere & Bassnett 1998: 1–11). In this article, André Lefevere and Susan Bassnett reflected on the century-long and theoretically sinuous path taken by the discipline since its dawn in the West through to the present day. Dividing the (pre‑)history of Translation Studies into three models (the Jerome, the Horace and the Schleiermacher model), the authors ended their assessment with a question: “Where next?”, concluding that there was still much that we needed to know. Amongst the areas to be explored, the history of translation was a major concern, as was the need to know more about “acculturation processes” and the “texts that constitute the cultural capital” of a given civilisation. In the same year, a research project entitled “Literary Histories and Translations. Representations of the Other in the Portuguese Culture” was being formed in Portugal under the supervision of Teresa Seruya. The project, which is now nearing completion, involves seven participants from different research areas in the humanities and different home institutions. Its broad-ranging programme comprises three aims: a) to research the impact and repercussions that literary translations have (had) on the development of ideas, genres, movements and tastes in Portuguese cultural history; b) to discuss and emphasize the role of literary translators — well-known or anonymous — as cultural (underground) agents within a given cultural geography; c) to uncover different (diffi

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

dent? challenging?) dialogue(s) with various cultural others at diverse times and their (later) canonical representation and institutionalisation in literary histories, anthologies, collections, criticism, etc. Thus, from 1998 to 2005, the research group attempted to contribute to the creation of a history of translation in Portugal. In the words of Anthony Pym, this process comprises three different and difficult moments: translation archaeology, historical criticism and explanation of the translation phenomena (Pym 1998: 5–6). Having concluded that literary translation is largely absent from the metadiscourse of literary historiography, the group has decided that the best way to tackle the phase of explanation would be to join efforts and work with other research centres [the centre of English studies at the University of Lisbon and the centre of Anglo-Portuguese studies at the Nova University]. The goal is to produce much needed work on the historical figures and professional personae of literary translators.

3. Of architects and underground agents. Where are we in Translation Studies today? Accepting that achieving its goals is a massive task, the group organises regular encounters (conferences, colloquia, etc.) for TS researchers to discuss case studies, translation theories and methodologies. This ultimately led to an overview of where literary translation studies stands nowadays, answering two very ambitious questions on the history of the discipline in Portugal: (1) what has been researched and published on literary translation and translators in Portugal, by/for whom, to what end, and within what institutional framework?; (2) what are the most important issues to be studied in the future, what areas need to be dealt with most urgently and what tools are still wanting? Providing answers, however tentative, to these questions will perhaps be a first step towards drawing a map of the interfield in a given cultural setting. This may enable the community of researchers to take full account of a cartography of achievements and events, assess it and create a rough outline for the geography of what remains to be discovered/explored. We propose to outline the history of research on literary translation by tackling its development in five provisional excavation sites,2 since Translation Studies scholars have to be both archaeologists of scattered material (translations, translators and reflection on translation and translators),3 as well as architects of what remains to be undertaken.

3.1 Excavation site I: Medieval Translation. Three examples of an unstable concept This section is concerned with examining the contributions made by current theories and reflections on Portuguese medieval translation to knowledge of this period. It



T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes

draws on recent investigations by a range of authors and a selection of a small number of representative corpora. The analysis falls into the following three main groups: 1. The work of two researchers from two different institutions, focusing on the Portuguese translation of a classical work (Ovid’s Heroides) included in Cancioneiro Geral compiled by Garcia de Resende (1516). By examining the original sources and producing a philological gloss, Ana Tarrio’s study (1998) shows how the transference of values from other cultures and the transformations in the socio-cultural milieu are reflected in and change the translations. In this context, Tarrio (2001) established a comparison between the original text and the linguistic options found in the translations, revealing the autonomy of the translator from the Latin and his intention to pay tribute to the vernacular language as the language of culture and a sign of national identity. However, in our approach to “Dido Aenae” (Seruya 2001: 37–58), we have adopted a different perspective based on comparing the different processes used in those translations, both those included in Ovide Moralisé (still in accordance with the access ad commentatorem) and the one by Sá Meneses, which is closer to the access ad auctorem of the humanist syntheses on translation. The analysis of the paratextual elements made it possible to reflect on the inner history of translation, the position adopted by the translator, the evolution of the concept of translation, and the functional objectives and concerns about reception by a specific audience. 2. The forewords by Vasco Graça Moura to the translations of Villon (1998) and Petrarch (2003), revealing the author’s point of view on translation. In this section, a brief theoretical overview of these and other prologues by Graça Moura on translation issues confirms his consistent position regarding form and content, linked to the concept of “quasi la stessa cosa”, i.e., the strategies and codes of transformation informed by criteria of adequacy and truthfulness to the attitudes of the poets he praises, while maintaining the uniqueness of his own voice. 3. The research of authors who have regularly published papers on medieval studies within the framework of the Centro de Literatura e Cultura Portuguesa e Brasileira (CLCPB) of the Catholic University of Portugal (UCP), Lisbon. Maria do Carmo Oliveira (Seruya and Moniz 2001: 83–94) discusses the place of translation in ten Portuguese literary histories published in the period from 1941 to 1996. In 2001, the author examined a corpus of seven histories of Portuguese literature in order to see how translation was considered in the sections on the reign of King Dinis. In general terms, the concept of translation that emerges from the literary historiography is static. Thus, reflection suggests the need for a critical appreciation governed by initial and operational norms of literary translation, since only then will it be possible to accept the historical reality of the translations and assign the histories of Portuguese medieval literature the function of revising and widening the narrative of a multi-stranded literary system. Oliveira (Seruya 2001: 25–36) examines the contexts and textual implications of translations within the context of the ancient textual transmission, with reference to the fundamental guidelines in the prologue of Confessio Amantis. João Dionisio (ibid.: 59–69) refers to the original texts that may account for

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

King Duarte’s use of certain entomological terminology in his prologue to Leal Conselheiro. Cristina Almeida Ribeiro (Oliveira and Lopes 2002: 23–40) examines the reception and translations of Dante in Portugal, one of which was the work of three different translators, as well as the relationships with the original text and the different degrees of complexity in the configuration of the target language. Finally, a study by Oliveira and Guincho in 2003 (Seruya 2003: 87–106) addressed the translations of Boccaccio’s Decameron. Together, these form a multi-stranded source of research into the political and sociological perspectives of Translation Studies. From the brief statement above, it can be concluded that current research follows a tradition that has developed at two main levels: reflection on the practice of translation and its context, and translation itself. Given the instability of the concept of translation in the Middle Ages, these studies are governed by analytical, descriptive or integrative criteria rather than by judgement or simply linguistic criteria. At the same time, the phenomenon of translation is seen as an instrument of intercultural/interliterary mediation and even as the continuation of literary production.

3.2 Excavation site II: Canon and transcultural aesthetic experiences. On Portuguese translations of French classical drama Most studies on the reception of classical French drama in 18th- and 19th-century Portuguese literature place the translated texts in a contextualised, aesthetically historicised framework. Recent research in this area shows that the architect-translator of classical French drama from that period is simultaneously an underground agent and a “surface agent”, a condition that calls for superimposing the construction and the visible reconstruction (as well as whatever reconstruction still remains invisible) of both the period’s literary history and its drama history. The earliest studies in this area date from the 1940s and bear the Lansonian title “Racine, Molière, and/in Portugal”, although they unveil the all but unknown historical and literary world of Portuguese drama from the 18th and 19th centuries (Lima 1940). These “influence studies” dwell in a sort of unconscious periphery of Translation Studies where criticism regards Molière and Racine as translated foreign writers rather than as rewritten writers. Other projects followed in the 1950s and 1960s as part of an archaeological survey of sources (Faria 1950; Pimpão 1962). Translations of the works of Molière, Racine and Corneille were then inscribed in a contextual justification of Portugal’s own “Querelle du Cid”, which revolved around the question of 18th-century literary academies. Even so, translation was still a pretext (as well as a pre-text). The third theoretical and methodological stage of the research focuses on reception studies, starting in the 1980s (Barata 1998; Brito 1989; Ferreira 1982; Rebello 1984). The dialectical relationship that such studies establish between Portuguese translations of classical French drama and the consolidation of a Portuguese national drama are part and parcel of an expansive methodology of literary history which – either consciously or unconsciously – tends to stimulate the very theorising of the re-



T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes

writing process. Thus, the dual perception of the translated text found in the kind of research that characterised the 1950s and in today’s “case studies” entails the increasing affirmation of the notion of (literary, cultural and social) difference. While not exhausting the epistemological debate, a variety of sets of historical and meta-historical problems gradually come to the fore: a) identity strategies/processes of scriptural authority; b) drama in translation/the “ideologies” of rewriting (translation becomes a socio-cultural stance vis-à-vis literary norms, an object of aesthetic self-definition, as well as an irrefutable “locus” of production; c) the powers/power of translation (the influence of aesthetic authority – of Academies’ Discursos; the influence of political authority – of the “Real Mesa Censória”). The case studies carried out show that this persistent historical visibility of both the translator and the translated text offers a number of different paths for future research (Anacleto 2002; Marinho 1998). These range from the theoretical approach (covering the workings of the systems of aesthetic signification, including the possibility of rewriting the history of Portuguese drama from that period based on the theory and praxis of translation), to the historical approach (which deals with the demarcation of the status of translators-authors-theoreticians in literary history) to the geographical approach (devoted to the mapping of translation over a certain period, including translators’ personal profiles, the body of translated works, and plural models of imports from abroad). The study of Portuguese translations of classical French drama is therefore tantamount to setting out along the paths that lead to – and cross – literature’s centre(s).

3.3 Excavation site III: Brave Old World. Conceptions and misconceptions regarding translation in the 19th century Even a brief glance at the literature on 19th-century translation produced in recent decades immediately reveals at least three aspects: (a) much more work is being done and many more people are involved than might initially be supposed; (b) most research results either in papers or MA dissertations, with most of the latter unfortunately ensconced in libraries where few read them. PhD theses and larger bodies of work are not yet abundant; (c) much of the work has what we would like to call a “literary slant” to it. At first sight, it seems fair to say that most of the ongoing research fits loosely into the branch of Descriptive Translation Studies, and is generally productoriented. In other words, most of the doctoral theses, MA dissertations, papers and essays examined are case studies. Hence, our argument is that while there are many interesting and enlightening individual studies, to the best of our knowledge, no effort has been made to reconstruct the broader landscape of 19th-century Portugal. Product-oriented DTS research has so far failed to produce even the outlines of a history of translation(s). Although this statement may be seen as unduly harsh, since the literature on the period is already impressive and the research admittedly difficult, we would still argue that three hurdles stand in the way of researchers who wish to produce a tentative history of translation: (a) most researchers work alone on individual projects

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

that are related to individual career advancement; (b) research in Translation Studies is time-consuming, as the translator’s path has to be reconstructed almost from scratch, and data is sometimes difficult to find, an issue that is clearly at odds with deadlines and cumulative pedagogical work; (c) most researchers now working in Translation Studies come from adjoining fields such as literary studies. This may account for the aforementioned “literary slant” that often characterizes the work published. One obvious example is the organisation of research around the concept of author(ity), which implicitly imposes that texts be either on an author in the source language or on an author in the target language. The existing contributions to the field can be tentatively classified into four groups:

1. Reception studies: most early contributions properly belong to this group. Translation generally occupies a chapter in the history of the reception of an author/ text and/or, more infrequently, a poetics (e.g. Delille 1984a and 1984b);

2. Bibliographies: two fundamental bibliographies of translations have been published since the 1990s: Gonçalves Rodrigues’ Tradução em Portugal (Translation in Portugal) (1992, 1993, 1994) and Isabel Lousada’s Para o Estabelecimento de uma Bibliografia Britânica em Português (1554–1900) (Establishing a British Bibliography in Portuguese. 1554–1900) (1998);

3. Literary and cultural studies: most contributions from Portuguese studies, which are regrettably few and far between, fall within this scope. They generally involve research into one author and his/her impact on the literary (and, being the 19th century, political and social) culture of the time. Since the vast majority of 19th-century authors were, at one time or another, translators, literary historians and critics are usually forced at least to acknowledge this secondary activity;

4. Translation studies: people working in translation history can be roughly divided into two groups: the MA and PhD students working on their theses, and the older generation from literary and cultural studies who began to research and promote research in the field during the 1980s. Again, much has been accomplished in these last two decades. However, what may be missing is the leap from valuable individual case studies to collective work, aiming to create a landscape of integrated knowledge. Therefore, it would seem logical to leave the old assumptions of authority and originality behind and embrace the brave new world of endless networks between writers and rewriters that have helped shape our present-day culture.



T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes

3.4 Excavation site IV: The Estado Novo and the production/circulation/reception of translations The archaeological approach to the history of literary translation in Portugal under the Estado Novo (1933–1974) starts with a short characterisation of this dictatorship, whose nationalist ideology proclaimed “regionalism” as the key orientation for cultural policy (Ramos do Ó 1996: 895; Ramos do Ó 1999; Rosas 1992). Both the political police and censorship played an important role in implementing this policy. Although there is still a lack of much information on the real functioning of censorship (due to unorganised or missing archives), evidence suggests that books and publishing – especially foreign literature – largely managed to escape this state control. In terms of Portuguese culture, the collections of foreign or world literature which constitute the sample corpus for the present research – 31 collections produced by 15 publishers between 1940 and 1974 – may be regarded as countering the official policy of nationalist regionalism. Moreover, in a sense, they can be said to be part of the democratic opposition culture to the Estado Novo. In any case, these collections represent literary translation on a large scale. Gideon Toury’s concept of “culture planning” is an efficient tool to understand the changes these translations introduced at many levels in Portuguese literary life (Seruya 2001a: 17–32; Seruya 2005: 31–52); Toury 2003: 399–412), such as the emergence of future famous writers through translation and (especially in the 1940s) their role as a counterbalance for the meagre Portuguese production, which explains the complaints from publishers. We are currently involved in gathering and processing information on the production, publication and dissemination of the 1800 titles by some 650 authors from 31 countries, so that we may be able to answer such questions as what was available to the common reader who did not understand foreign languages, what countries these works came from, and the identity of the dominant culture, according to countries, authors and titles. As expected, France was the leading culture. Nevertheless, when examining the total number of translations, this result changes. According to the Index Translationum, Spanish authors were the most frequently translated between 1952 and 1961 as sentimental novels and similar works came to dominate.

3.5

Excavation site V: The 20th-century boom in Translation Studies

The field of Translation Studies has made considerable progress in Portugal over recent decades. However, this boom has not significantly changed the way in which the literary history of the 20th century has been told or written outside the discipline in Portugal: no importance was attached to literary translation in forming movements and canons in Portuguese literature, in educating reading habits (Rosa 2002), or in the role that it played in the book market, although sociological studies have proved that in the 1990s, only a minority could read in a foreign language (Freitas 1997). The interest in the study of literary translation has thus been confined to the academic fields of com-

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

parative literature or foreign literatures and excluded from studies on Portuguese literature, which is still largely understood as a closed system of original texts. The first successful attempts to analyse the role of literary translation in 20th-century Portuguese literary history focused on the influence exerted on national writers by the translations of German poetry published in the 1940s and 1950s. However, the first study of such influences was only published as late as the early 1980s (Saraiva 1984). The 1985 Conference of the International Association of Comparative Literature and the publication of its proceedings in 1993 were decisive events for the development of Translation Studies in Portugal. The studies and/or bibliographies on twentieth-century literary translation as facts of the target culture analyse either the importing of literary objects from a certain linguistic or cultural area, or the dominant ideas on translation in the system (Pinho 1998), as well as the translation of certain texts or authors in the form of case studies. However, the translating activity of well-known Portuguese authors remains almost unexplored and – despite several appeals to include translated literature in literary history and in the Portuguese literary system – the many case studies published in the meantime have yet to produce a global overview (Flor 1996). Although some syntheses have been attempted in the study of the role of translation in theatre (Zurbach 2002) or in juvenile literature (Blockeel 2001), the way in which Portuguese literature behaved during the twentieth century has still to be studied, as has the importing of different literary objects. Some relevant (and not exclusively literary) aspects of the cultural construction of Portuguese national identity in the confrontation with the Other have been revealed. However, very few studies clearly analyse translation as a fact in Portuguese literature and culture, amongst other cultural and literary facts that are not related to translation. The point of departure for defining a study corpus is still the source cultural or linguistic context or the author and the source text in order to approach the target text. The boom in Translation Studies in the late twentieth century not only established the theoretical and methodological bases, but also produced a significant number of case studies for the literary system as a whole. Thus, translation can (and must) cease to be on the periphery and become a core element in Portuguese literary history.

4. “Blueprinting” Translation Studies. Where to now? Having very briefly sketched the state of the art on literary translation studies, the authors would like to finish with Lefevere and Bassnett’s “what next” questions [1998: 10–11]. While we do endorse most of their “we need to…” answers, we would add some suggestions that are more specific to researchers in Portugal.4 First, we need to move away from predominantly researching translators who were acknowledged authors at a given time. If we persist with this approach, we are reaffirming the paradigm of authorship against other cultural phenomena, such as translation



T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes

and rewritings in general. We also need to shift our perspective from author to translator, since the vast majority of translators were not authors in the traditional sense. Thus, should we preserve the myth of authority, we will be perpetuating the silence that surrounds translators and barely contributing anything new to what we already know about any given time. Within this context, we hardly need to point out that the working conditions of regular literary translators are not comparable, not even nowadays, to those enjoyed by authors who translate. Therefore, we need Translation Studies to study the identity of the anonymous translators, to find out how much they were paid, what they did when they were not translating, what kind of background they came from, etc. Second, we need to work on larger-scale, more ambitious projects such as a dictionary of translators, and a general history and sociology of translation. We need to know more about the functions that literary translation has fulfilled in society at different times. Third, we need to build better bridges to our colleagues in Portuguese studies, as we may provide indispensable information for a literary history which breaks away from the Romantic moorings and integrates models, texts, agents that may have helped to build the concepts of “literature”, “literary language” and “originality” as we now know them. Finally, we need to move outside national borders and interact more with our colleagues abroad, in order to achieve a more inclusive knowledge of the discipline. As a research group, we have now begun working more closely with other researchers to create a blueprint for a long-dreamed-of edifice: a dictionary of translators working in Portugal over the centuries. Again, the architecture for a proposed work of this scope must be grounded in archaeology. As translation historians, we are archaeologists of past lives, be it those of unnamed architects or invisible underground agents.

Notes 1. The limited scope of this paper – a map of literary translation studies in Portugal – has a threefold justification: (1) the definition and goals of the research project that led to this paper; (2) the overwhelming and mostly unknown body of work presented by literary translators over the centuries and the large amount of research being undertaken in the many other fields of Translation Studies [scientific, technical, media, etc.]; and (3) the time originally allocated to our panel and the space constraints imposed on the written synopsis of the panel. 2. It should be noted, however, that we do not claim to cover all periods of Portuguese literary history, but only those that are the subject of study by the individual members of the project. 3. Most volumes listed in the reference list are not exclusively dedicated to Translation Studies, since to some extent we still lack the proper channels for the discipline in Portugal. 4. Even though the research group acknowledges the importance of transcending national borders, the simple truth is that peripheral forms of literary phenomena do still very much remain an “undiscover’d country” in Portugal. We have to begin somewhere, and national identities are as good a heuristic principle as any, since they have determined so much of our history and our dialogue with the Other(s).

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

References Almeida, Justino Mendes (2003), “A Arte Poética de Horácio na Versão de Marquesa de Alorna”. In Alicipe e a sua Época, M. L. Machado de Sousa et. al. (eds), 73–88. Lisbon: Edições Coli bri/Fundação das Casas de Fronteira e Alorna. Anacleto, Marta T. 2002. “(Re)formulações do trágico raciniano na literatura portuguesa de Setecentos: a reescrita dos Árcades-I”. Deste lado do espelho. Estudos de tradução em Portugal. Novos contributos para a História da Literatura Portuguesa. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora. Barata, José O. 1998. História do Teatro em Portugal (séc. XVIII). António José da Silva (o Judeu) no Palco Joanino. Lisbon: Difel. Barrento, João (ed.). 1978. Deutschsprachige Literatur in portugiesischer Übersetzung. Eine Bibliographie (1945–1978) / Obras Alemãs em Tradução Portuguesa. Uma Bibliografia (1945–1978). Bonn/Bad Godesberg: Inter Nationes. Bassnett, Susan. 1993–94. “Taking the Cultural Turn in Translation Studies”. Dedalus: Revista Portuguesa de Literatura Comparada 3–4: 171–179. Bassnett, Susan e Lefevere, André. 1995. Translation, History and Culture. London: Printer. Blockeel, Francesca. 2001. Literatura Juvenil Portuguesa Contemporânea: Identidade e Alteridade. Lisbon: Caminho. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1992. Les Règles de l´Art. Genèse et structure du champ littéraire. Paris: Seuil. Brito, Ferreira de. 1989. Nas origens do teatro francês em Portugal. Oporto: Núcleo de Estudos Franceses da Universidade do Porto. Carreira, Gabriela. 1944. A Literatura Alemã em Traduções Portuguesas: Ensaio Bibliográfico. Lisbon: Instituto de Cultura Alemã. Ceia, Carlos et al. (ed.). 2003. Estudos Anglo-Portugueses—Livro de Homenagem a Maria Leonor Machado de Sousa, Lisbon: Edições Colibri. Cortez, Maria T. 1996. “Die Emanzipation der Frau und Grimms Märchen. Portugiesische Fassungen des 19. Jahrhunderts”. Runa, I. Internationaler Kongreß des Portugiesischen Germanistenverbandes (APEG) 26 (2): 603–613. Cronin, Michael. 2003. Translation and Globalization. London & New York: Routledge. Delille, Maria M. 1984a. “A Recepção do Fausto de Goethe na Literatura Portuguesa”. Runa. Revista Portuguesa de Estudos Germanísticos 1: 89–146. Delille, Maria M. 1984b. A Recepção Literária de H. Heine no Romantismo Português (de 1844 a 1871). Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda. Faria, Jorge de. 1950. “Um século de teatro francês em Portugal (1737–1837)”. Bulletin d´histoire du théâtre portugais, I (1): 62–92. Ferreira, João P. 1982. Academias Literárias dos séculos XVII e XVIII. Lisbon: Biblioteca Nacional. Flor, João A. 1985. “Shakespeare, Rosas e Brazão”. Miscelânea de Estudos Dedicados a Fernando Mello Moser: 233–246. Flor, João A. 1995. “Byron em Português: para o Estudo Histórico-Cultural da Tradução Li terária”. Dedalus. Revista Portuguesa de Literatura Comparada 5: 175–184. Flor, João A. 1996. “Tradução literária”. Vértice 2 (73): 21–24. Freitas, Eduardo de, Casanova, José L. e Alves, Nuno de A. 1997. Hábitos de Leitura: um Inquérito à População Portuguesa. Lisbon: Publicações D. Quixote. Guerreiro, Fernando (ed.). 1983. Problemas da tradução: escrever, traduzindo: II Jornadas de estudos sobre a tradução. Lisbon: Grupo Universitário de Estudos de Literatura Francesa.



T. Seruya, M. T. Anacleto, M. dos Anjos Guincho, D. Martínez Soler, M. Lin Moniz, A. Lopes Guerreiro, Fernando. 2004. “Ler, Escrever, Reescrever: O Lugar das Traduções na Historiografia Literária”. In Actas do Congresso Internacional de Literatura Comparada, Estudos Literários/ Estudos Culturais. Évora: Universidade de Évora – Associação Portuguesa de Literatura Comparada, CD – ROM / DVD. Hermans, Theo. 1999. Translation in systems. Manchester: St Jerome Publishing. Homem, Rui C. 1997. “Aos Pés da Donzela: Tradução, Cultura e Decorum num Hamlet (em) Português”. III Jornadas de Tradução: Tradução, Cultura, Sociedade: 42–48. Homem, Rui C. 2001. “On Negros, Jews and Kings: On a Nineteenth-Century Royal Translator”. The Translator, Studies in Intercultural Communication 7 (1): 19–42. Huylebrouck, Roza. 1991. “Traduções portuguesas de obras literárias neerlandesas”. Revista da Faculdade de Letras – Línguas e Literaturas (Oporto), 2nd series, 8: 337–347. Keating, Maria E. 2001. “Traduction et trompe-l’œil: les versions ibériques de La vie mode d’emploi de Georges Perec”. Meta 46 (3): 478–496. Lambert, José and Lefevere, André (eds). 1993. La traduction dans le développement des littératures: actes du XI Congrès de l’Association Internationale de Littérature Comparée (Paris, 20–24 août 1985)/Translation in the Development of Literatures: proceedings of the XI Congress of International Comparative Literature Association. Bern & Berlin: Peter Lang/Leuven University Press. Lefevere, André and Bassnett, Susan. 1998. Constructing Cultures. Essays on Literary Translation. Clevedon, Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters. Lima, Henrique de C. F. 1940. Racine et le Portugal. Lisbon: Institut Français au Portugal. Lopes, Alexandra. 2004. “The Goddesses of Small Translations. Engendering Translational Practices as Decanonization”. In Landscapes of Memory/Paisagens da Memória, I. Gil, R. Trewinnard and L. Pires (eds), 317–327. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora. Lousada, Isabel. 1998. Para o Estabelecimento de uma Bibliografia Britânica em Português (1554–1900). Lisbon: Universidade Nova de Lisboa (PhD thesis). Magalhães, Isabel A. de et.al. 2000. Literatura e Pluralidade Cultural. Actas do III Congresso da Associação Portuguesa de Literatura Comparada, 1998. Lisbon: Edições Colibri. Marinho, Cristina. 1998. Teatro Francês em Portugal: entre a alienação e a consolidação de um teatro nacional (1737–1820). Oporto: Faculdade de Letras do Porto. Mingocho, Maria T. 1996. “Eine portugiesische Übersetzung der Schillerschen Maria Stuart: Mendes Leals Maria Stuard”. Runa I. Internationaler Kongreß des Portugiesischen Germanistenverbandes (APEG) vol. II (26): 587–601. Moser, Fernando de M. 1982. “O lugar de José António de Freitas na Moderna Crítica Shakespeariana”. In Memórias da Academia das Ciências de Lisboa vol. II: 299–309. Lisbon: Academia das Ciências. Moura, Vasco G. 1987. “Traduzir Shakespeare. Várias Versões do Hamlet em português e mais que adiante se verá”. In Várias Vozes: 210–228. Lisbon: Editorial Presença. Moura, Vasco G. 1997. Os Testamentos de François Villon e Algumas Baladas Mais. Oporto: Campo das Letras. Moura, Vasco G. 2003. As Rimas de Petrarca. Lisbon: Bertrand Editora. Oliveira, Maria do C. and Lopes, Alexandra (eds). 2002. Deste lado do espelho. Estudos de tradução em Portugal. Novos contributos para a História da Literatura Portuguesa. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora. Pimpão, Álvaro J. da C. 1962. “La querelle du théâtre espagnol et du théâtre français au Portugal, dans la première moitié du XVIIIe siècle”. Revista de História Literária de Portugal: 259–273.

Notes for a cartography of literary translation history in Portugal 

Pinho, Jorge M. C. A. 1998. O escritor invisível: a tradução tal como é vista pelos tradutores portugueses. Oporto: Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto (MA thesis). Pym, Anthony. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Ramos do Ó, Jorge. 1996. “Secretariado de Propaganda Nacional (SPN) / Secretariado Nacional da Informação, Cultura Popular e Turismo (SNI) / Secretaria de Estado da Informação e Turismo /SEIT)”. In: Dicionário de História do Estado Novo, Vol. II, F. Rosas and J. M. Brandão de Brito (eds), 893–896. Lisbon: Círculo de Leitores. Ramos do Ó, Jorge. 1999. Os Anos de Ferro. O Dispositivo Cultural durante a ‘Política do Espírito’ 1933–1949. Lisbon: Estampa. Rebello, Luís F. 1984. Présence du théâtre français au Portugal (1700–1980). Paris: Fondation Calouste Gulbenkian. Rodrigues, A. A. Gonçalves. 1992. A Tradução em Portugal: Tentativa de Resenha Cronológica das Traduções Impressas em Língua Portuguesa Excluindo o Brasil de 1495 a 1950: vol. 1 1495–1834. Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional-Casa da Moeda. Rodrigues, A. A. Gonçalves. 1992. A Tradução em Portugal: vol. 2 1835–1850. Lisbon: Instituto de Cultura e Língua Portuguesa. Rodrigues, A. A. Gonçalves. 1993. A Tradução em Portugal: vol. 3 1851–1870. Lisbon: ISLA. Rodrigues, A. A. Gonçalves. 1994. A Tradução em Portugal: vol. 4 1871–1900. Lisbon: ISLA. Rodrigues, A. A. Gonçalves. 1999. A Tradução em Portugal: vol. 5 1901–1930. Lisbon: ISLA. Rosa, Alexandra A. 2002. “What about a Section on Translation in that Literary History Volume? On Literary Competence and Translation, Literary History and Descriptive Translation Studies”. Current Writing: Text and Reception in Southern Africa 14 (2): 175–191. Saraiva, Arnaldo. 1984. Para a História da Leitura de Rilke em Portugal e no Brasil. Oporto: Edi ções Árvore. Saraiva, Arnaldo. 1996. Fernando Pessoa Poeta – Tradutor de Poetas. Oporto: Lello Editores. Seruya, Teresa (ed.). 2001. Estudos de Tradução em Portugal: Novos Contributos para a História da Literatura Portuguesa. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora. Seruya, Teresa (ed.). 2004. 3.º Colóquio de Estudos de Tradução. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora. Seruya, Teresa (ed.). 2005. Estudos de Tradução em Portugal. Colecção Livros RTP – Biblioteca Básica Verbo – I. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Portuguesa. Seruya, Teresa and Moniz, Maria L. (eds). 2001. Histórias Literárias Comparadas. Lisbon: Edi ções Colibri. Soler, Dionisio M. 2000. “A tradução da literatura espanhola em Portugal (1940–1980)”. In ACT2: Entre Artes e Culturas, H. Carvalhão Buescu e J. Ferreira Duarte, 71–135. Lisbon: Colibri. Tárrio, A. M. 1998. “Algunas Lecturas del Cancioneiro Geral de Garcia de Resende desde los Elegiacos Latinos”. Euphrosyne XXVI, n.s.: 261–268. Lisbon: Centro de Estudos Clássicos, Fac. de Letras de Lisboa. Tárrio, A. M. 2001. “Tradução e nobilitação literária: uma estratégia não-re-latinizadora no português quinhentista”. Euphrosyne XXIX: 157–170. Lisbon: Centro de Estudos Clássicos, Fac. de Letras de Lisboa. Teixeira, Maria A. G. 1996. “Zur Werther-Rezeption in Portugal”. Runa I. Internationaler Kongreß des Portugiesischen Germanistenverbandes (APEG) vol. II (26): 579–585. Toury, Gideon. 2003. “Culture Planning and Translation”. In Translation Translation, S. Petrilli (ed.), 399–412. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Zurbach, Christine. 2002. Tradução e Prática do Teatro em Portugal entre 1975 e 1988. Lisbon: Colibri.

Establishing an online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies Pamela Grant Université de Sherbrooke, Canada Kathy Mezei Simon Fraser University, Canada

In recent years Canada has achieved international recognition not only for its prize-winning writers (Margaret Atwood, Michael Ondaatje, Yann Martel, Carol Shields), but also for innovation and leadership in Translation Studies, which has emerged as a relatively new but increasingly vibrant field of scholarly research and publication in our country. In order to facilitate the dissemination and exchange of information about Canadian Literary Translation Studies and foster an increasingly collaborative and international research process, researchers at the Université de Sherbrooke in Sherbrooke, Quebec, Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, British Columbia, and Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec, have established an online bibliographic database of theoretical and critical writing on literary translation in Canada as part of the larger Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures/Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères. This paper outlines the background of this web-based project and the procedures set in place, as well as the inevitable challenges that may well resonate with other translation bibliographies.

Keywords: translation bibliography, online bibliographic database, literary translation, Canadian literature, Translation Studies

1. Introduction Translation has long played an essential role in bilingual and bicultural Canada. Since the 1970s there has been a dramatic increase in literary translation, particularly between



Pamela Grant and Kathy Mezei

English and French, the two official languages, but in later years between other languages and Canada’s two official languages as well. Translation Studies has correspondingly emerged as a relatively new but increasingly vibrant field of scholarly research and publication in this country. Our database of comparative studies in Canadian, Quebec, and Foreign Literatures and its substantial component of Translation Studies reflect the marked growth of scholarly interest in Canadian literatures, and their translation in a comparative and transnational context. The Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures/Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères is the initiative of a team of Canadian researchers at the Université de Sherbrooke, Simon Fraser University and Concordia University. This team has been compiling bibliographic data on publications in the fields of comparative Canadian literary studies and Canadian literary translation studies in order to facilitate the dissemination and exchange of information about these disciplines. This interactive database is bilingual (French and English) and offers access free of charge to users anywhere who are seeking information about theoretical and critical writing on Canadian, Quebec and other literatures, comparative Canadian literatures, and literary translation in Canada.

2. Canadian Literary Translation Studies While writing in the two founding literatures dates back to the early years of colonisation in the seventeenth century, comparative studies of French- and English-Canadian literatures, or what the novelist Hugh MacLennan famously called the “two solitudes,”1 have been more recent.2 In his “Historical Introduction: Comparative Canadian Literature,” David Hayne traces the first comparative inquiries into English- and FrenchCanadian literatures back to 1867 (1989: 9), 3 although he states that “serious … efforts to link the two major Canadian literatures began only during the 1920s” (ibid.: 10). Comparative literary analysis developed momentum in the latter part of the twentieth century, signalled by the landmark studies of Ronald Sutherland, Clément Moisan, Philip Stratford and E.D. Blodgett. Similarly, Canadian literary translation and its study are relatively new phenomena. As Jean Delisle wrote in 1987 in La Traduction au Canada/Translation in Canada: 1534–1984, “[a]lthough literary translation has never been a tradition in Canada, the translation of pragmatic texts is part of the very fabric of our institutions, and it permeates the daily life of all cultural and linguistic groups, whether of minority or majority status” (1987: 34). The recorded history of translation and interpretation in Canada began with a violent and coercive act: in 1534 Jacques Cartier captured two Iroquois, carried them off to France, and then used them as interpreters on his next voyage to New France. Thus, from early on, translation bore the stigma of cultural appropriation and colonial exploitation. French and English were given official status in Canada first by the language provisions of the British North America Act of 1867, the Act which

Online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies 

created the Dominion of Canada, and second, a century later, by the federal Official Languages Act of 1969. Under the auspices of the latter act, federal policies promoting national bilingualism were initiated and federal support for literary translation was provided. Thus Canadian translation practice has always been rooted in political necessity, since all federal documents and services must be available in both official languages throughout the country, with the Federal Translation Bureau overseeing much of this translation activity. In the second part of the twentieth century, both English-Canadian and Quebec literatures blossomed as the two communities asserted their national identities and attempted to resist the domination of Britain, America and France. In the 1960s and 70s, in the face of Quebec’s deep discontent, fears about its cultural and linguistic survival, and occasionally violent attempts to obtain independence from the rest of (English) Canada, literary translation, especially from French to English, began to flourish. During this time of political tension, literary translation was fostered by the federal government to help mitigate the political problems surrounding Quebec’s desire for sovereignty as well as to advance official bilingualism and biculturalism. It has since grown to play a consistent if subdued role in Canadian cultural life. In more recent years, translations from English to French have increased and have begun to outnumber those from French to English.4 As part of the government’s strategy to promote bilingualism, the Canada Council Translation Grant Program was created in 1971 to help Canadian publishers fund translations between the two official languages. Then in 1975, the Literary Translators’ Association of Canada was established by practicing translators to support literary translation and to lobby for recognition, support and fair payment of literary translators. By 1987, literary translation was included in the annual and prestigious Governor General’s literary awards. Other significant steps in the gradual legitimization of literary translation in Canada include the founding of journals such as ellipse (1969), Meta (1955) and TTR (1987); the publication of Philip Stratford’s 1977 Bibliography of Canadian Books in Translation: French to English and English to French/Bibliographie de livres canadiens traduit de l’anglais au français et du français à l’anglais; and the inclusion of the “Translation” section in University of Toronto Quarterly’s annual Letters in Canada, beginning in 1977. During this period, a number of significant literary translations were published by various small publishing houses (such as Exile, Harvest House, Pierre Tisseyre’s “Collection des deux solitudes,” Oberon, Anansi, Véhicule, Guernica, Coach House Press, Talonbooks, XYZ, Boréal, Leméac and Cormorant), and translation programs were introduced at various universities (such as Concordia, Glendon College, Laval, the Université de Montréal and the Université de Sherbrooke). During the last ten to fifteen years, the theorization and practice of Canadian literary translation have been broadening their parameters. Whereas translation in Canada had traditionally focused on writings in English and French by Canadian and Quebec authors, Canadian translation practice and studies have expanded of late to encompass aboriginal languages and cultures as well as other minority or migrant literatures like



Pamela Grant and Kathy Mezei

Spanish, Italian, Chinese and Arabic to more equitably reflect our diversity. Thus, Canadian feminist writers and translators, in part through the providential collaboration and interaction between French and English experimental women writers, have led in modeling a theory of gender and translation that has influenced international Translation Studies. Derived from their collaborative engagement with Quebec feminists and theorists such as Nicole Brossard and France Théoret, Barbara Godard and Susanne de Lotbinière-Harwood have initiated what has been called “la traduction au féminine” (Tessera 6, 1989). In Canada as elsewhere, Translation Studies has been affected by the forces of transnationalism, globalization and the problematic pervasiveness of English. Recognizing that Canada, Quebec and their literatures can be perceived in terms of colonization because of their alterity and their power relations with respect to more dominant cultures, Sherry Simon and Paul St. Pierre (2000) have incorporated postcolonial approaches into their study of Canadian literary translation. By comparing the translation status of minority literatures in Canada and India, they have also significantly extended Canadian translation terminology. Outside Canada, international translators and scholars have recognized how Canada’s unique bilingual situation has shaped its translation history, practices and theories and influenced the field of Translation Studies. For example, as Edwin Gentzler acknowledged in Contemporary Translation Theories (1993: 184), “the complicated question of Canadian identity – problems of colonialism, bi-lingualism, nationalism, cultural heritage, weak literary system, and gender issues are involved – seems to provide a useful platform from which to begin raising questions about current translation theory.” Susan Bassnett (1995: 157) also referred to a Canadian school that conceptualizes translation as political activity. Comparing Brazilian and Canadian translation theorists, Bassnett observed that both groups are “concerned to find a translation practice and terminology that will convey the rupture with the dominance of the European heritage even as it is transmitted.”

3. Evolution of the Bibliography Project Our Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures/ Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères has its roots in the graduate programs in Comparative Canadian Literature at the Université de Sherbrooke.5 From the outset, literary translation played a significant role, and annotated literary translations have been a popular subject of graduate student theses. Antoine Sirois and his colleague, David Hayne of the University of Toronto, began to compile bibliographic information about publications in the field, which they published as supplements in the Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée from 1976 to 1986, demonstrating the significance of this emerging field. The first monograph edition of the bibliography, the Bibliography of Studies in

Online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies 

Comparative Canadian Literature/Bibliographie d’études de littérature canadienne comparée, 1930–1987, was published in 1989, with the participation of Maria van Sundert and Jean Vigneault. In 1995, when Winfried Siemerling and Gregory Reid joined the bibliographic team at Sherbrooke, it was decided that the project should produce an online research tool as well as a book publication. The team received its first Social Science and Humanities Research Council grant6 to develop a research tool, and began preparing an updated bibliography for publication both in a hardcopy format and in a searchable electronic database. The resulting database has since been made available in both print and online form: in 2001, the team published the Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures/Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères 1930–1995 (Sherbrooke: GGC editions), which contains over 1600 entries, categorized under 13 headings and searchable by category as well as by indexes of scholars, authors under study, and geographical regions. Early efforts to make the data available online were refined when, in 2001, the database was made available at the website www.compcanlit.ca. Initially, the field of comparative Canadian literature was conceptualized in binary terms: Sirois and Hayne’s early bibliographies focused primarily on French- and EnglishCanadian comparisons. As the scope of the bibliographies expanded, work on ensuing editions has not only served to produce a resource tool for students and scholars, but has also redefined the limits of the discipline and reflected the evolution of this field of study. Over the past ten years, the focus of the comparative bibliography has moved beyond the “bind of binarism” (Blodgett 1982: 25) of English-Canadian and French-Canadian literatures towards comparisons of one or both of these literatures with foreign or other domestic literatures, including emergent literatures (minority, migrant, regional, aboriginal). The bibliography also encompasses relevant works in Translation Studies, postmodernism, postcolonialism, ethnicity, and cross-disciplinary studies. The parameters for inclusion in the database have been articulated as follows: works that provide a significant comparison or discussion of Canadian and/or Québécois literatures, including their production, translation, reception, study, history, effects and influences, in relation to each other or in relation to other literatures of the world. The Translation Studies component has quickly assumed a significant role in the project. The decision to develop the area of Translation Studies within the bibliography led to our joining the project team (Pamela Grant in 1998 and Kathy Mezei in 2001). Kathy Mezei had already published an annotated bibliography in 1988, the Bibliography of Criticism of English and French Literary Translations in Canada: 1950–1986/ Bibliographie de la critique des traductions littéraires anglaises et françaises au Canada: de 1950 à 1986, in the University of Ottawa Press’s Cahiers de traductologie series, and permission was obtained from the publisher for the entries from the Mezei bibliography to be transferred to the project’s online database. Just as the Sirois group’s approach to comparative literary studies has developed beyond its original French-English focus, so has the approach to Canadian Literary Translation Studies.



Pamela Grant and Kathy Mezei

Whereas the entries in Mezei’s published bibliography had focused on criticism of Canadian literary works translated from English to French and French to English between 1950 and 1986, the Translation Studies team now includes writings preceding 1950 and up to the present on the translation of Canadian literature into French, English and other languages, on literary translation from or into Canadian native languages, and on literary translation by Canadian translators wherein the Canadian context or culture plays a significant role (for example, Michel Garneau’s translation of Macbeth into joual). The database also presents studies of translations from those minority literatures and languages in Canada that have a significant translation corpus, especially Spanish. Also included are theoretical works that discuss Canadian literary translation and works by major Canadian literary translation theorists, which mention or are pertinent to Canadian literary translation, the corpus of which has vastly multiplied since Mezei’s Bibliography. Translations themselves are not listed, but significant forewords, introductions and prefaces to translations are. As the field of Translation Studies continues to expand, two other scholars have joined the team with expertise in French/English (Patricia Godbout, Sherbrooke) and English/French/Spanish translations (Hugh Hazelton, Concordia). This widening of the parameters for both comparative studies and translation studies in Canada reflects global shifts in literary studies. Increasingly, Comparative Canadian Literary and Translation Studies are less limited to the nation-state and more widely situated in a global and transnational context. Moreover, as Susan Bassnett (1995: 11) points out: “[c]omparative literature has traditionally claimed translation studies as a sub-category, but this assumption is now being questioned…. as translation studies establishes itself firmly as a subject based in inter-cultural study and offering a methodology of some rigour, both in terms of theoretical and descriptive work….”

4. From paper to an online database The database contains at present almost four thousand entries, with some one thousand entries specifically related to Translation Studies being prepared. Entries include bibliographies, monographs, theses, conference proceedings, periodical articles, book chapters, reviews, prefaces, introductions, interviews, films, sound recordings, electronic publications and linked internet sites. Each entry contains full bibliographic details, a list of keywords and geographical regions, and the titles of any works, authors or translators under study. We have constructed the website to permit users to browse alphabetical listings of authors, authors under study, translators under study, and geographical regions. The database can also be updated on an ongoing basis to include the most recent publications, with no need to wait for publication of the hardcopy version. Our goal is to ensure that the database is user-friendly and accessible. The 2001 Sirois bibliography and the 1988 Mezei bibliography were both print publications, whereas the project’s current database is being published online. Since

Online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies 

the team also plans to publish another print bibliography in the coming years, the project continues to compile data for both print and online dissemination. This need to prepare data, in parallel, for both the online database and a future hardcopy publication has added to the technical complexity of the project: a fundamental challenge has been to find software and interfaces (translations of a sort!) that are straightforward enough for student researchers to manipulate, can generate an online bibliography, and can also allow the generation of a future hardcopy publication.7

5. Work procedures The compilation of data begins with graduate student research assistants, working under the guidance of professors, first consulting selected sources and identifying articles and other works to be retrieved and analysed. All material is retained and filed in an archive at the project centre in Sherbrooke and is therefore available for in-house researchers and visitors to consult. Data entry is now web-based: the project’s internal website provides a shared virtual workspace where researchers can check each other’s entries as well as consult resource material such as lists of headings and model entries. Each researcher has his or her own MySQL account on the project’s worksite and can enter the data from any computer, using any platform, with no need for dedicated software. The internal project website is the hub of the project and allows researchers to review minutes and instructions from past meetings, consult online tutorials for various procedures, and refer to the rules, procedures and protocols that have been adopted by the project. It also enables the cross-Canada team to maintain easy contact with one another and with the database. Each researcher’s database consists of a template with a number of fields in which data is entered. One set of fields contains bibliographic information (book title, article title, journal title, name of author, contributors, publication information, etc.); another set contains information on the content (keywords, authors under study, translators under study, geographical regions, annotations, etc.). This new procedure gives the research assistants autonomy, responsibility and control over their own entries, and allows them to work from any place where they have online access: from the library, from the office, or at home. In order to encourage the exchange of information and participation in this field of research, a “contribute” page has been added to the website; it invites users to contribute bibliographic information about their own and other publications, which can subsequently be verified, edited and incorporated into the Bibliography. By acting as an online host for outside researchers who would like to contribute data to the bibliography, the project fosters an increasingly collaborative and international research process.



Pamela Grant and Kathy Mezei

6. Challenges Despite refinements and improvements over the last ten years, numerous challenges still face us. First, the construction of a comprehensive thesaurus of keywords remains to be completed. It was the consensus among presenters on translation databases at the EST congress in Lisbon in 2004 that the construction and organization of keywords and a thesaurus present a shared and persistent challenge to all bibliographic projects. The Irish Translation database Trasna (Centre for Translation and Textual Studies. “Trasna Online biography of Irish literature in translation.” August 2006 ) and the Translation Studies Bibliography (TSB) (John Benjamins. “Translation Studies Bibliography.” August 2006 ) were also presented there.8 Specifically, Luc Van Doorslaer (TSB) spoke of the need to find a balance between plurality and consistency and to organize keywords according to a conceptual map. While the project researchers for our Canadian bibliography have standardized the most common keywords used to articulate primary research issues, the list continues to expand and remains open-ended. With the diverse disciplines encompassed by the database, the possibility of establishing a fixed list of keywords remains elusive; the list is inevitably in constant flux, with the unfortunate consequence that researchers must revise and update entries, a time-consuming endeavour. A second challenge is posed by the multilingual character of the material collected for the bibliography. The print bibliographies, the website, and the entries have traditionally been bilingual, in English and French. This has necessitated the use of bibliographic formats that respect the conventions of both of these languages. Now that we have expanded our parameters to include works in other languages, questions of bibliographic format as well as the language of keywording become more complex. Of course, the extent to which we can include material in other languages is necessarily restricted by the language competencies of the individual researchers, several of whom are fortunately multilingual. The team includes researchers fluent in German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Swedish, Danish and Icelandic. The need to both back-date and update the database is also a challenge. As the number of publications in the fields under study continues to grow, so does the work involved in ensuring that the bibliography stays abreast of the extensive writing by Canadian translation scholars and comparatists. Communication and co-ordination among the researchers continue to be a challenge if we are to avoid the duplication of source searches and data entry. The team has recently appointed a research assistant co-ordinator who oversees data entry and vets entries for correct format and protocols. Annual meetings of the entire team demonstrate that in-person as well as virtual communication is indispensable. A final challenge is that of outreach. The project needs to establish contacts and exchanges with the international scholarly community. The project team is therefore striving to inform other scholars of its work, publicize the website, foster collaboration, and establish links with research centres, institutions, agencies and other online tools.

Online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies 

Notes 1. “Two solitudes” is drawn from Hugh MacLennan’s 1945 novel Two Solitudes, and has evolved into a commonplace, overworked metaphor for our bicultural, bilingual state. In All the Polarities Philip Stratford adopted the double helix, a parallel spiral formation, to describe the two literatures. The double spiral staircase at the Château de Chambord, which two people can climb without meeting each other, was the image Pierre-Joseph-Olivier Chauveau, Quebec’s first premier, drew of the two cultures (Stratford 1986: 3). Ellipse refers to a geometrical sphere with two centres and provides the logo of the translation journal, ellipse. 2. An overview of comparative Canadian literary studies can be found in two key articles, David M. Hayne’s “Historical Introduction: Comparative Canadian Literature” and Antoine Sirois’ “Bilan de la recherche, 1930–1987.” It is not coincidental that Sirois and Hayne were founders of the bibliographic work described in this article. These two articles are available in electronic form on the project’s website. 3. The publication was Henry James Morgan, Bibliotheca canadensis, or a Manual of Canadian Literature (Ottawa: G.E. Desbarats, 1867. xiv, 411 p.) Facsimile reprint by Gale Research Co., Detroit, 1968. 4. According to statistics presented by André Vanasse, editor of the Quebec literary journal, Lettres québécoises, at a panel discussion, “Literature Beyond Linguistic Borders,” at the Salon du livre de Montréal on November 19, 2004. 5. The Master’s program in Comparative Canadian Literature was established at Sherbrooke in 1963, and the Ph.D. in 1979. 6. This project has been funded for over a decade by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, whose support we gratefully acknowledge. 7. In 2001, the team was introduced to a “package” of open source software based on an interface called MySQL, which allows researchers to enter data directly into a web-based database. Previously, the data had been entered into a word processing program called Nota Bene, which includes a tool called Ibid that stores and generates bibliographic data. For a description of the programming that underlies the comparative Canadian literature bibliography site, see TaylorJohnston, John. 2004. “Une bibliographie en ligne des Lettres: un modèle à code source libre. Le cas de www.CompCanLit.ca”. Documentation et bibliothèques 50.2: 177–188. 8. See also the translation database published by St. Jerome Publishing, Bibliography of Translation Studies: http://www.stjerome.co.uk/tsaonline/index.php (August 2006). (It was not presented at the Lisbon congress).

References Bassnett, Susan. 1995. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Blackwell. Bassnett, Susan and Lefevere, André (eds). 1990. Translation, History and Culture. London: Pinter. “Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures/Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères.” Available on-line at http://www.compcanlit.ca (retrieved August 2006).



Pamela Grant and Kathy Mezei Blodgett, Edward D. 1982. Configurations: Essays in the Canadian Literatures. Downsview, Ont.: ECW Press. Blodgett, Edward D. 1991. “Towards a Model of Literary Translation in Canada”. TTR 4 (2): 189–206. Brisset, Annie. 1990. Sociocritique de la traduction: théâtre et altérité au Québec (1968–88). Longueuil, Québec: La Préambule. Delisle, Jean. 1987. La Traduction au Canada/Translation in Canada 1534–1984. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. Even-Zohar, Itamar. 2000. “The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem”. In The Translation Studies Reader, L. Venuti (ed.), 192–197. London and New York: Routledge. Garneau, Michel. 1978. Macbeth de William Shakespeare. Trad. en québécois. Montréal-Nord: VLB. Gentzler, Edwin. 1993. Contemporary Translation Theories. London: Routledge. Hayne, David M. 1989. “Historical Introduction: Comparative Canadian Literature”. In Bibliography of Studies in Comparative Canadian Literature / Bibliographie d’études de littérature canadienne comparée, 1930–1987. A. Sirois, J. Vigneault, M. van Sundert and D. M. Hayne (eds), 9–17. Sherbrooke: U. Sherbrooke. Available on-line at http://www.compcanlit.usherbrooke.ca/hayne.html (retrieved August 2006). Hayne, David M. and Sirois, Antoine (eds). 1976. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian)”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 3 (2): 124– 136. Hayne, David M. and Sirois, Antoine (eds). 1978. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): second supplement, 1976–77”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 5 (1): 114–119. Hayne, David M. and Sirois, Antoine (eds). 1980. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): fourth supplement, 1978– 79”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 7 (1): 93–98. Hayne, David M. and Sirois, Antoine (eds). 1982. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): sixth supplement, 1980– 81”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 9 (2): 235–240. Hayne, David M. and Sirois, Antoine (eds). 1985. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): ninth supplement, 1983– 1984.” Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 12 (3): 462–468. MacLennan, Hugh. 1945. Two Solitudes. Toronto: Collins. Mezei, Kathy. 1988. Bibliography of Criticism of English and French Literary Translations in Canada/Bibliographie de la critique des traductions littéraires anglaises et françaises au Canada [Cahiers de traductologie #7]. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. Moisan, Clément. 1983. A Poetry of Frontiers: Comparative Studies in Quebec/Canadian Literature. Victoria, B.C.: Press Porcépic. Moisan, Clément. 1986. Comparaison et raison: essais sur l’histoire et l’institution des littératures canadienne et québecoise. La Salle, Québec: Hurtubise, HMH.

Online bibliographic database for Canadian Literary Translation Studies 

Reid, Gregory J. 2002. “Parameters and Procedures for the Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures”. Unpublished paper presented at the International Conference on “Canada in the European Mind”, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary, October 24–27, 2002. St. Jerome Publishing. “Translation Studies Abstracts and Bibliography of Translation Studies.” Available on-line at www.stjerome.co.uk/tsaonline/index.php (retrieved August 2006). Simon, Sherry and St. Pierre, Paul. 2000. Changing the Terms: Translating in the Postcolonial Era. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. Sirois, Antoine. 1989. “Bilan de la recherche, 1930–1987”. In Bibliography of Studies in Comparative Canadian Literature /Bibliographie d’études de littérature canadienne comparée, 1930– 1987, A. Sirois, J. Vigneault, M. van Sundert and D. M. Hayne (eds), 83–100. Sherbrooke: U Sherbrooke, Département des lettres et communications. Available on-line at http://www. compcanlit.usherbrooke.ca/sirois.html (retrieved August 2006). Sirois, Antoine and Hayne, David M. (eds). 1977. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): first supplement, 1975–1976”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 4 (2): 205–209. Sirois, Antoine and Hayne, David M. (eds). 1979. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): third supplement, 1977–1978”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 6 (1): 75–81. Sirois, Antoine and Hayne, David M. (eds). 1981. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): fifth supplement, 1979–1980”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 4 (2): 93–98. Sirois, Antoine and Hayne, David M. (eds). 1983. “Preliminary Bibliography of Comparative Canadian Literature (English-Canadian and French-Canadian): seventh supplement, 1981–1982”. Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue canadienne de littérature comparée 10 (1): 80–85. Sirois, Antoine, Vigneault, Jean, van Sundert, Maria and Hayne, David M. (eds). 1989. Bibliography of Studies in Comparative Canadian Literature /Bibliographie d’études de littérature canadienne comparée, 1930–1987. Sherbrooke: U. Sherbrooke, DLC. Sirois, Antoine, Grant, Pamela, Hayne, David M., Reid, Gregory J., Siemerling, Winfried and van Sundert, Maria (eds). 2001. Bibliography of Comparative Studies in Canadian, Québec and Foreign Literatures /Bibliographie d’études comparées des littératures canadienne, québécoise et étrangères 1930–1995. Sherbrooke: GGC editions. Stratford, Philip. 1986. All the Polarities: Comparative Studies in Contemporary Novels in French and English. Toronto: ECW Press. Sutherland, Ronald. 1971. Second Image: Comparative Studies in Québec-Canadian Literature. Toronto: New Press. Sutherland, Ronald. 1977. The New Hero: Essays in Comparative Québec/Canadian literature. Toronto: Macmillan. Taylor-Johnston, John. 2004. “Une bibliographie en ligne des Lettres: un modèle à code source libre. Le cas de www.CompCanLit.ca”. Documentation et bibliothèques 50 (2): 177–188.

The role of technology in translation management Hanna Risku Danube University Krems, Austria

Translators play a key role in the growing market for intercultural technical communication and translation technologies can assist them in several areas of their work. However, there has been little study as yet of the use of such technologies in real translation working environments. The author’s current research seeks to address this situation and determine when, to what extent and with what consequences the tools available can best be used. How can translators and technical communicators best utilise technology to improve the way they work and increase their efficiency, yet without compromising their creativity or lowering the required quality of their products?

Keywords: computer-aided translation, translation management, cooperative text design, usability, computer-supported cooperative work

1. Introduction This paper looks at the role played by technology in the creation of expert texts for international audiences. It considers possible direct and indirect users of translation technologies, the opportunities these technologies can open up, their limitations and, in some cases, even the dangers that can arise from their ill-considered use. It also provides an overview of the scientific background to translation technologies, followed by a description of available tools and technologies and current requirements for translation management. Finally, a concept for the future of Translation Studies teaching and research is proposed.



Hanna Risku

2. Methodology and approach A scientific analysis of the use of technology in translation management has to respect the golden rule of usability research, namely that a valid assessment of the sense and purpose of a particular technology is only possible if the researcher is aware of and understands the environment in which it is either used or to be used. “Always design a thing by considering it in its next larger context – a chair in a room, a room in a house, a house in an environment, an environment in a city plan.” (Eliel Saarinen, Finnish architect)

This demands a detailed analysis of the target users, their work and their workplace to identify where the use of technology-based tools can help solve real problems and where such use might even be counterproductive or cause problems of its own. Any study of the use of translation technologies must first answer the following questions: – Who uses translation technologies and why? – In what context are these technologies used? Basically, translation technologies are information technology tools designed and developed to support translators in their work. However, until very recently, few systematic studies had been available on their practical use. Two notable exceptions are the questionnaires evaluated by Austermühl (2001) and the survey carried out by Freigang and Reinke (2002). Consequently, my research into the practical effects of translation technologies has also included a number of qualitative studies to examine modern terminology and translation management practices and the role played by technology in this context. These include an interview study of intercultural technical communicators and a field study involving the on-site observation of daily working life in a translation agency in Vienna over an extended period of time. In the latter, the members of the research team (myself included) assumed a new role: we were no longer translators working in the harsh reality of the translation world, but instead participatory observers of activities in a translation agency. The resultant case study offers a practical illustration of some of the key aspects of the role played by technology in terminology and translation management. In the following, I will briefly describe the setting for the field study in Vienna. However, to leave sufficient room for a discussion of the role of technology in general and a summary of the results of both the interview and the field studies, I will refrain from including quotations from the observation protocols or describing specific incidents in detail. For direct quotations and references to these field observations see Risku 2004. At the time of the study, the agency had five staff (all female): the Managing Director (with a Business Studies degree) and four project managers (all with Translating/ Interpreting degrees). They work with over 1,000 translators and interpreters around the world, as well as a number of other translation agencies. To keep themselves at the

The role of technology in translation management 

forefront of translation technology, they also have a cooperation agreement with a major supplier of language technology tools. The majority of their customers are large corporations who regularly need material translated into multiple target languages. Orders come from various departments in a customer organisation, and it is these departments that usually also act as contact for any translation questions. It is rare for the technical writer of the source text to also act as the translation contact person. Translated texts are proofread either by other translators or by staff at the customer’s offices in the target country. Projects can involve working with different departments in one company, e.g. the department handling the order and the marketing department, or even with an internal department and an external advertising agency. Figure 1 illustrates the relationships between the translation agency, its customers and its translators.

T Technology Partner

Customer

T

T TA

T T

TW

T

D

D D

TW

T

Translation Agency

D

T

TA

T T

D/AA CS

Figure 1. Translation management: case study partners (D=Department, TW=Technical Writer, AA=Advertising Agency, CS=Customer Site, T=Translator, TA=Translation Agency).

3. The potential users of translation technologies The field study identified the following typical direct and indirect users of translation technologies: – Managers and project managers in translation agencies – Freelance or in-house translators – Text coordinators or project managers placing translation projects



Hanna Risku

– Technical editors and information designers who produce material for an intercultural audience. These are all primarily experts in the field of intercultural communication. However, the observation study described above and the results of a qualitative interview study also revealed a number of other fields of work that might benefit from the use of translation technologies, including – Cooperation and team work (e.g. to ensure consistency) – Source and reference material production (quality, context, consistency, textual interdependence and dynamics, file formats). Awareness of this additional circle of possible users is important, since they greatly extend the scope of and possibilities for such technologies. Translation technologies not only support translators, they also influence the whole intercultural technical communication network. Consequently, it seems to make sense to consider the technologies that are to be used for translation and terminology management right at the start of the translating process, i.e. in the production of source material.

4. The translation management process If translation technologies do indeed influence the whole intercultural technical communication process and network, one interesting option for increasing the quality and efficiency of translation would be to combine the source and target text production pro cesses in new forms of content management. In doing so, it then seems relevant to consider the “translation process” from a broad perspective: there are elements missing in – theoretical descriptions, – the basis for the evaluation and development of translation technologies, and – translator training if they – begin with a clearly defined, final and complete source text, – assume various analysis and synthesis phases, and – expect the output to be a target text that is as final and complete as the source text. What is missing is a consideration of the translation management process as a whole. This process plays a key role in any translation project and cannot be completed properly without technological support. The individual skills and tasks that make up this process include: – Customer negotiations and consulting services – Preparation of source and reference files

The role of technology in translation management 

– – – –

Preparatory research Project management Coordination of teams and partners Administration and distribution of documents (i.e. information, version and docu ment management) – Maintenance of translation memories and terminology databases. The partnerships in intercultural communication networks are varied and complex and include suppliers, customers, consultants, applicants and long-term partners. They communicate with each other not just as representatives of their individual expert roles, but also as individuals. Consequently, the management of translation and interpreting projects involves far more than just the coordination of texts and deadlines: it is also about managing people. The image of translation work that emerged from the observation study was one of strong human relationships of identification and connection. These relationships began with the initial contact and were based on mutual respect and loyalty to each other and the common task, the enabling of intercultural technical communication. The translation managers shared the opinion that you have to be able to rely on your partners to successfully complete complex projects and deal with unexpected problems. Indeed, many steps seemed to be there to strengthen the personal relationships between the partners. Once an order had been accepted, the actions that followed were oriented not just towards completing this project, but also towards future cooperation. If this is also true of other translation environments, it has far-reaching consequences for translation technologies: these must be designed to support such cooperation. There is much more to human cooperation than can be shown in a simple workflow diagram. Although verbal or written agreements are good guidelines in the turmoil of a hectic project, they nonetheless remain subject to the changing conditions that form the reality of project work. Project management can be likened to crisis management: unplanned changes and delays are to be expected. Communication is also conflict management: a mutual understanding is nothing more than a hypothesis to be refuted at any time. Intercultural technical communication has much in common with applied know ledge and information management, usability and content management. Therefore, they can be seen as related disciplines that all share similar issues, ways of thinking and goals, yet each entails its own specific skills and expertise. One consequence of shorter product cycles, globalisation and increased specialisation is the need for rapid access to up-to-date knowledge. Information is a raw material, to be handled like any other resource; i.e. its use can be planned, calculated and developed. Text design is a perfect example of an activity involving the processing of information and knowledge as raw materials. The text design process involves many tasks, including research, archiving, forwarding, updating and sharing information in a variety of formats and media, e.g. plain text, interactive webpages, brochures, CDs or

 Hanna Risku

videos. Thus, translators also act as information hubs, collecting and filtering information, adapting it to the needs of the target group and distributing it. Consequently, reusability becomes increasingly important, and hence the need for translation memories, content management or single-source publishing. Since technical translations often have to satisfy strict economic criteria, cost is often the determining factor. Productivity, efficiency and profitability are necessary requirements and cannot be ignored in academic discourse, particularly when discussing working practices.

5. The scientific background to translation technologies Intercultural technical communication takes place in a world immersed in cultural influences. It is hard to find a path, place or object that has not been formed or manipulated by human hand. We are surrounded by artefacts. In fact, they are sometimes so prevalent that we consider them second nature, and they almost “feel” like a part of us. People try to shape their environment to reduce their cognitive processing load. Diaries, PDAs, notebooks or even a knot in a handkerchief can all help. They take the strain off our memories and facilitate coordination. In the same way that scaffolding is used to help construct large buildings, people make use of tools to support their actions and understanding. This is the broad definition of artefacts taken in Situated, Embedded Cognition (see Clark 1997). It includes all human creative achievement, from psychological instruments such as language and rules of thumb, to the culturally developed tools and spatial setting of an activity. Technology can perform routine tasks and provide people with an overview when working on complex tasks. It should bridge distances more effectively, enable ongoing social interaction and a distribution of information that brings all participants to the same level of knowledge on deadlines and terminology. However, technology will only be accepted if it can be integrated into traditional behaviour. Consequently, the interaction of a wide range of environmental issues also becomes relevant in a consideration of translatory action. We are not just interested in how a technology works, but also in when it is used and, above all, when it is not used. Practice shows that despite appropriate expert systems, people often still prefer to ask their colleague next door. This corroborates results of work in the field of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. As Bowker et al. (1997: xviii) note, “People and things are mixed together, and extend each others’ capacities”. In other words, the issue is always the combination of sociology and technology, rather than the replacement of one by the other. According to Vester (1980: 108), the greatest risk of digitalisation or the use of computers lies in the “computer-adapted, IT-compatible language and way of thinking”. This limits exactly those parts of the human brain that are superior to the computer, namely the ability to draw analogies, explain through examples (instead of a simple classification by type and characteristics) and creativity.

The role of technology in translation management 

As products of social and cognitive developments, technical aids embody aspects of the actual context or setting. Lueger (2000: 162) refers to these as “invisible worlds of meaning”, hidden in instruments. Thus, translation technologies contain traces of the history of intercultural technical communication, which in turn contribute to their development. Tools not only help people to remember things or manage complex tasks, they also shape the understanding and behaviour of cooperation partners. The image of work projected by the technology used is decisive and influences Prunč’s “culture of translation” (Prunč 2001). One of the roles of “communicators” is to handle tasks that do not form part of their customers’ core business. This emphasises the importance of understanding and an ability to present the skills and responsibilities involved in intercultural technical communication. The working environment and tools influence the complete process and, ultimately, product quality. Translation technologies can be selected according to the – volume to be produced – production cycle sequence – intercultural technical communication set-up (distributed across a network or centred around a specific location) – complexity of cultural and media variations. The rise of information technology has changed not just the degree of automation and availability of relevant information in the translation process, it has affected the whole translation process. This is confirmed by Freigang and Reinke (2002), whose study indicates that project teams, cooperation and teleworking have become an integral part of day-to-day life in the translation business. The feeling of belonging and having a stable professional identity no longer comes from working in a static environment, in a real place where people regularly come together. Instead, people communicate remotely across networks or join communities of practice to discuss issues of common interest, increase their understanding and work more effectively. Since they have to make do without their informal meetings around the coffee machine or water cooler, technology-based communication solutions become increasingly important. The narrative elements of such conversations are often re-used and distributed in subsequent contacts, using various media. They create continuity of time and place, particularly in fast-moving projects. They also help people to get back on track with project status following a change of location or longer break, by establishing an ongoing shared history with each communication partner and maintaining relationships through the continuous flow of information.

6. Technologies available to support the translation process If cooperation in translation can be seen as a dynamic, networked process, what role do the various artefacts (including translation technologies) then play in this process? The



Hanna Risku

ability to use a particular tool can become a defining factor or even prerequisite for membership in such a network. For example, all translators seeking to work for the translation agency studied had to be able to work with its translation management system. In a professional context, the way experts work is influenced not only by the IT solutions designed specifically for their own profession, such as translation technology in the narrower sense, but also by other more general office applications. A broader look at the translation process (one which considers the tasks involved in managing translation projects) also has to consider these more general applications. In doing so, we widen the perspective on translation, thus looking beyond the manipulation of linguistic material to the dynamics of this specific professional practice and context. This is why we include both workflow management technology and direct aids to translation in the discussion below. A number of different technologies are available to support the translation process, including terminology management systems, translation memory systems, localisation software, machine translation tools, specialised project management tools, internet platforms and virtual communities. Terminology Management Systems ensure that uniform terminology is used throughout a translation or by a project team and can make a significant contribution to the quality of a translation by ensuring consistency. Combining terminology management systems with internet technologies creates new ways of working, giving online access to centrally stored data at a translation agency or customer site. Translation Memory Systems are useful for handling large translation volumes, particularly when a project is coordinated centrally and consistency plays an important role. However, there is a risk with translation memory entries that solutions devised for a different context may dominate the current text. This is often aggravated by poor source and reference material and problems with file formats that require the source file to be converted. Consequently, in some contexts the staff at the translation agency considered translation memory systems more of a hindrance than a help. Translation memories can only contribute to the quality of a translation and increase cost-effectiveness if a number of criteria and requirements are met (such as availability of specific text formats, well-considered program parameters, high-quality reference material and a link to a well-maintained terminology management system). The issue is not whether a translation memory system should be used, but rather which one is the most appropriate for the actual cooperation and the economic benefits of such a system. If the individual members of a virtual team use different systems, these obviously have to be compatible. From a quality aspect, translation technologies have advantages and disadvantages. Using a client’s translation memory provides the translator with access to existing context and “history”, thereby increasing productivity. However, since translation memory systems are based on a comparison of individual elements, they follow the amateurish strategy of translation as a simple substitution of elements in different languages. Furthermore, they work on the “garbage in, garbage out” principle. Whilst

The role of technology in translation management 

professional translators might accept a translation proposed by a translation memory system for what it is (a suggestion), cooperation partners misunderstand this and assume these suggestions to be viable translations which do not need to be checked or validated against the current context. Integrated Translation Management Systems can be deployed in a number of additional specific skill-based tasks, such as word counting, invoicing, archiving and research. They can also be used to calculate and create standardised cost estimates. Nevertheless, they cannot replace the way a human translator construes meaning. For example, they cannot develop situation-based communication strategies, nor decide on research criteria nor choose between two possible solutions. Consequently, the basic conflict between creativity and control remains and such systems force translators to organise their work in a very specific way. According to Wagner (1997: 429), a technology-induced way of working often assumes the role of a “powerful standard image from which it is difficult to step back”. This is a central issue in Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, where the discussion focuses on how technology may help to encourage flexibility and creativity, support legacy-based work methods and even allow for unconventional or “quick and dirty” methods. Localisation software offers a good example of the role translation technology can play in supporting translation skills and enabling translators to work on more than just purely linguistic material. The possibilities offered by localisation tools support cooperative translation and can improve the quality of a translation. They allow translators to view the actual user interface during the translation process and thus take the context into consideration. Translators can adapt some items themselves (e.g. button size), or delegate more extensive program changes to the software developers (e.g. a change of syntax in a dialog box or navigation path). In this way, the entire software product becomes the object of the translation. Localisation tools allow translators to endow products with their knowledge of the links between linguistic, formal and cultural requirements (cf. Freigang 1996). Without localisation tools, translators would have to decode decontextualised words, phrases or sentences when translating software programs and then have to wait until the language elements have been imported into the target language version of the product before they can verify the effects of their efforts – a laborious task, the results of which are all too familiar (from the early days of computer technology). Machine Translation Systems are really only being mentioned in this context for reasons of completeness. Despite decades of development and substantial R&D budgets, such systems still cannot offer fully-automated high-quality translation. The old nightmare that kept translators awake is no longer a threat and machine translation systems can still only be used for limited purposes, e.g. to create pre-translations or to “skim over” a document. Today’s language technology industry focuses on developing tools to assist translators, not replace them. Specialised Project Management Systems for translation projects provide an up-todate overview of the status of a project, the documents involved, remaining steps and



Hanna Risku

costs incurred. They store versions of the source and target texts and also include a customer and supplier database, with translator and interpreter details. Integrating the various files, lists, electronic address books, tables and databases not only reduces the amount of work involved, it also allows automatic report generation, e.g. on the profitability of individual projects or customers. Project management software can also show the number and status of projects currently allocated to an individual translator, thus avoiding work being sent to a translator already booked for other projects. It can also improve cooperation with partners, particularly when data on shared projects is made accessible to external users. However, in the translation agency studied, the staff were concerned that personal contact might be lost with such a project management system. For example, following a meeting on translation rates, they concluded that whilst it might in theory be possible to standardise rates in their project management system, in practice such a standardisation could only be implemented using a more expensive program with different (more targeted) functionality. In another example, they complained about having to enter data manually into the system, since this offered no advantage over their current way of working. Despite these misgivings, the consensus was that the time saved by using a project management system (in particular for repetitive, monotonous tasks like filling out order forms or writing invoices) was its main advantage. Specialised Internet Platforms offer a range of functions for managing translation projects, including up-to-date visualisation of individual process steps for each of the actors involved, administration of project workflow, logging of all activities for reporting purposes and the integration of standard tools such as Translation Memory Systems. This raises an important question: if translators, technical communicators and their customers can use an Internet-based cooperation portal to manage all aspects of a translation project, will translation agencies then not become unnecessary? This seems highly unlikely, since many customers have neither the expertise, interest nor time to deal with specialised questions from individual translators. This can only really be expected in globally active companies with large amounts of multilingual content to be turned around in a relatively short period of time. In the same way that translation management systems assist rather than replace translators, internet translation portals will not make translation agencies redundant, but rather help them to coordinate large translation projects. Virtual Translation Communities are rapidly assuming an important role in the working lives of (freelance) translators, offering them a chance to communicate and learn from each other via the internet and at the same time improve their skills. A study by Dickinson (2002) on virtual translation communities confirms that participation in online chatrooms, e-mail lists and other discussion forums for translators can be an inspiring and motivating experience. They strengthen the feeling of belonging to a worldwide translation knowledge community.

The role of technology in translation management 

7. Consequences for Translation Studies and translation teaching Intercultural technical communication is clearly a growth market. A central issue in translation teaching could be how translators and technical communicators can best utilise technology to improve the way they work and increase efficiency, without compromising their creativity or lowering the quality of their products. Translation technologies can save intercultural communication professionals a great deal of effort and leave them more time to concentrate on their “real work”, which is highly creative and benefits greatly from the availability of contact details, contextual information, reference files and terminology in electronic format. When compared with other creative professions (e.g. architecture), it seems almost absurd that the use of information technology and re-use of earlier translations has at times even been misunderstood as quasi-automatic translation: computers play a key role in an architect’s work – from the use of CAD tools to the re-use of results of previous projects – yet we do not expect mass produced designs at dumping prices or worry that architecture might be a dying profession! The ability to offer a cost-effective service to regular customers for whom a great deal of reference material, prior solutions and tacit, cooperative knowledge is already available, is as natural a customer retention measure in intercultural technical communication as it is in architecture and can be seen more as an indication of the quality of an agency’s knowledge and information management expertise than as the partial automation of a skilled, creative task. The antinomy between creativity and control also seems to convey some of the basic questions facing translation technology: when, to what extent, by whom and with what reliability can it be used? Empirical field research will help to uncover how translation managers answer these questions on a case-by-case basis and, in turn, contribute to the development of scientifically supported, efficient modi operandi – best practices – for the modern workplace. The use of technology in terminology and translation management will surely benefit from the assumption of a pragmatic, functional perspective. As far as research and teaching are concerned, technology should be considered in its context as part of a whole situation, pushing non-linguistic, social and communicative factors into the centre of the analysis. Similarly, the central issue of cooperation in translation is an aspect that ought to be considered in the development of current and future translation tools. Translators, but also translation scholars, must ultimately demonstrate a sound understanding of the economic and industrial context of their work or research, e.g. the telecommunications market or the software development process. There are a number of ways of achieving this knowledge and understanding, e.g. through qualitative field research, “work placements” and the use of authentic or quasi-authentic orders, team assignments and role playing in translation teaching. Such teaching should seek not simply to impart specific knowledge and expertise, but also to prepare students for an appropriate, productive career as an expert among experts.



Hanna Risku

Göpferich (1998) confirms that the areas of activity involved in technical translation and technical writing are increasingly converging. Future Translation Studies graduates will find themselves working in a heterogeneous and extremely dynamic environment. If study programmes in translation want to prepare their students adequately for future careers in the intercultural communication network, they should consider the benefits of adopting an interdisciplinary perspective and also of providing their students with a sound background in the fields of technical communication, localisation and international usability. Each individual field (from management, support, consulting and implementing through to routine positions) comprises different tasks. Universities can provide students with a scientifically sound, practice-oriented education that equips them for careers at all levels, be they in the translation industry or in Translation Studies research, thus also providing for the next generation of scholars. Today’s language technology industry focuses on developing tools to assist translators, not replace them. One of the key tasks of Translation Studies is to actively participate in technology development and ensure it concentrates on the needs of the translation and technical communication industries. There is great potential here for increased interdisciplinary cooperation – from Computer Linguistics through to Artificial Intelligence and Translation Studies. Translation and technology are extremely dynamic fields, and postgraduate courses for the translation community are gaining in popularity. The new requirements placed on these fields by society offer an excellent opportunity not only to expand existing programmes, but also to introduce new, state-of-the-art courses, thereby attracting increasing numbers of Translation Studies graduates and other cooperation partners back to the modern Centres of Excellence for Translation Studies. Such courses would seem ideally placed to combine a focus on the latest tools and technology with the establishment of long-lasting, mutually beneficial dialogue between practical scientific research and scientifically based practice.

References Austermühl, Frank. 2001. Übersetzen im Informationszeitalter – Überlegungen zur Zukunft fachkommunikativen und interkulturellen Handelns im Global Village. Trier: WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Bowker, Geoffrey C., Star, Susan L., Turner, William and Gasser, Les (eds). 1997. Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work. Beyond the Great Divide. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Clark, Andy. 1997. Being There. Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Dickinson, Angela M. 2002. Translating in Cyberspace. Virtual Knowledge Communities for Freelance Translators. Master Thesis, Donau-Universität Krems.

The role of technology in translation management 

Freigang, Karl-Heinz. 1996. “Software-Lokalisierung. Ein Gegenstand übersetzungswissenschaftlicher Reflexion?“. In Übersetzungswissenschaft im Umbruch. Festschrift für Wolfram Wilss zum 70. Geburtstag, A. Lauer, H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast, J. Haller and E. Steiner (eds), 135–146. Tübingen: Narr. Freigang, Karl-Heinz and Reinke, Uwe. 2002. “Wirtschaftliche und qualitätsbezogene Aspekte der Nutzung von Translation-Memory-Systemen“. Mitteilungsblatt für Dolmetscher und Übersetzer, 4-5/2002: 39–44. Göpferich, Susanne. 1998. Interkulturelles Technical Writing: Fachliches adressatengerecht vermitteln. Ein Lehr- und Arbeitsbuch (= Forum für Fachsprachen-Forschung 40). Tübingen: Narr. Lueger, Manfred. 2000. Grundlagen qualitativer Feldforschung: Methodologie – Organisierung – Materialanalyse. Wien: WUV. Prunč, Erich. 2001. Translation in die Nicht-Muttersprache und Translationskultur. TEXTconTEXT 15=NF 5,2 (2001): 283–299. Risku, Hanna. 1998. Translatorische Kompetenz. Kognitive Grundlagen des Übersetzens als Expertentätigkeit. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Risku, Hanna. 2004. Translationsmanagement. Interkulturelle Fachkommunikation im Informationszeitalter. Tübingen: Narr. Vester, Frederic. 1980. Neuland des Denkens. Vom technokratischen zum kybernetischen Zeitalter. dtv Sachbuch 10220. Wagner, Ina. 1997. “On Multidisciplinary Grounds: Interpretation Versus Design Work”. In Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work. Beyond the Great Divide, G. C. Bowker, S. L. Star, W. Turner and L. Gasser (eds), 415–432. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Establishing rigour in a between-methods investigation of SI expertise Adelina Hild State University of New York, Binghamton, USA

The paper presents an experimental investigation of expert discourse processing during simultaneous interpreting (SI) and critically examines how rigour was achieved at several stages of the research process: sampling, standardizing the SI task, and data management. Between-method triangulation is introduced as a means of offering completeness, enabling the researcher to approach the complexity of SI expertise in a more proximal manner.

Keywords: SI expertise, methodological rigour, triangulation, discourse processing, research process

1. Introduction This paper addresses the topic of SI expertise research against the background of the current debate in interpreting research (IR) around the assessment of quantitative and qualitative methods and the extent to which these can be appropriated to study the interpreting process. Specifically, it outlines the assumptions built into the data collection and analysis processes in a multi-method study of SI discourse processing and critically examines the difficulties and the strategies adopted in establishing methodological rigour. Rigour is the means by which we demonstrate integrity and competence (Aroni et al. 1999) and attempt to validate and legitimize our research and findings. Different sets of quality assurance criteria have been formulated by the quantitative and qualitative paradigms reflecting underlying differences in ontological and epistemological perspectives. The nomological concepts of validity, reliability and generalizability have been seriously questioned in the qualitative meta-discourse (Denzin & Lincoln 2000), in which

 Adelina Hild

a tentative consensus is emerging on a new set of (comparable) validating criteria for naturalistic enquiry (cf. Lincoln & Guba 1985). In combining both qualitative and quantitative methods to address the construct of SI expertise, the study discussed here adopted a pluralistic approach to legitimize the research process. Alongside the mentioned positivistic criteria it incorporated triangulation and subscribed to the more general requirement of goodness, both of which were chiefly gleaned from the qualitative paradigm. Arminio & Hultgren (2002) suggest that goodness, an application of rigour, should be viewed as an integral component of the research process, and that evidence for it should be provided in a discussion of the specific grounding for the study, in explicitness about data handling and in the process of interpreting the findings and presenting new insights. To examine concretely how rigour was established in the current study, I shall begin with a synopsis of the project and proceed to highlight four aspects of it where rigour was at issue. The aspects in question concern triangulation, sampling, assessing task representativeness and data management.

2. Synopsis of the SI expertise study 2.1

Theoretical foundation

The paradigm informing the research project was the theory of expert processing formulated in the course of the last three decades following the publication of the seminal work of Chase & Simon (1973). In one version of the theory, often referred to as the “deliberate practice approach”, Ericsson and his colleagues (Ericsson & Kintsch 1995; Ericsson & Delaney 1999) highlight the role of practice as the sole factor responsible for achieving expert-level performance through the acquisition of task-specific cognitive structures and mechanisms, referred to as long-term working memory (henceforth LT-WM). They propose that through the acquisition of specialized memory skills, experts learn to encode and access on-line structures in LTM in a fast and reliable way, thus, in effect, increasing the functional capacity of their working memory (hence “long-term”). As an integral part of the acquisition process, Ericsson & Kintsch (1995) contend that experts acquire the ability to select task-relevant information, based on their previous knowledge of task constraints, and to encode it in a manner anticipating future retrieval demands. The mechanism of LT-WM, in their view, also accounts for the considerable incidental memory for task-related information established in cued-recall studies of expert processing across a variety of domains. These three characteristics of expert performance – superior performance, selectivity and improved incidental memory – were investigated in the present expertise study.

2.2

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

Findings concerning SI expertise

The research project was designed as an expert-novice comparison, contrasting a group of eight professionals (with nine years of experience on average) with a similarsized group of eight interpreter-trainees, three months into their Master’s degree in Conference Interpreting Techniques. Its research objectives were specified with respect to the three characteristics identified above as follows:

1. Register reliably the significantly superior performance of experts by measuring accuracy;

2. Study selectivity by plotting accuracy variations with respect to a set of verbal cues (fourteen syntactic, semantic and discourse cues) guiding the allocation of attention in SI;

3. Investigate the nature of SI incidental memory construed as memory both for task content, i.e. for ST, and for performance.

The most general results from the quantitative analysis of performance and recall are presented in Table 1 and they clearly demonstrate a robust superiority for the experts. Consistent expert-novice differences in allocation of attention to verbal information were also recorded, comparable to previous empirical enquiries in the field (see Ivanova 1999 for a detailed discussion). Thus, for example, syntactic rather than semantic cues were found to predict variations in performance accuracy for novices, suggesting their dependence on surface structure information. Table 1. Quantitative data from SI performance analysis, free and cued recall. Data type

Experts (S=8)

Novices (S=8)

Significance

Performance accuracy

0.81

0.57

Z=41.1, p<.001

Free recall score Cued recall score

0.117 (SD=0.046) 0.518 (SD=0.115)

0.046 (SD=0.025) 0.213 (SD=0.062)

t=3.83, p<.001 t=10.84, p<.001

Furthermore, the study provided complementing evidence for the superior memory of expert interpreters through integrating findings on their superior recall accuracy, with evidence from the analysis of retrospective protocols elicited following SI (see Table 2 for a summary of the methods employed in the project). The characteristics of expert SI performance, as identified in this study, paralleled findings on expert processing in a variety of domains and dovetailed nicely with the few other investigations of SI expertise (most notably, Liu 2001). This comparability was highly valued in the subsequent analysis of the research process as a means of demonstrating the robustness of its findings.

 Adelina Hild

3. Methodological triangulation The metaphor of triangulation has crossed over disciplinary boundaries and through its appropriation in education, ethnographic, social, organizational research and, more recently, Translation Studies (Alves 2003, PACTE 2003) has come to refer to a variety of research designs which aim at more creativity, more integrationism and higher confidence of results (see Miles & Huberman 1994 for various types of triangulation). Triangulation has often been recommended as a means of resolving qualitative/quantitative differences and of strengthening the validation process. Jick (1979: 609) advocates the use of qualitative data in triangulation, for it “functions as the glue that cements the interpretation of multi-method results”. However, combining qualitative and quantitative paradigms is fraught with potential problems. Massey (1999) discusses six logical errors inherent in triangulating for the sole purpose of confirmability, which oftentimes bespeak in his opinion an implicit prioritizing of methods. An alternative view of triangulation as offering completeness has also been promulgated in the methodological literature (Breitmeyer et al. 1993). Completeness emerges when research attempts to capture the complexity of the investigated phenomenon through combining different types of findings generated by the application of different methods, very much in analogy with the process of putting together a puzzle from complementary pieces of information. If triangulation is to ensure robustness through either completeness or confirmability, a major challenge for researchers lies in demonstrating explicitly how the mixture of perspectives is achieved and how a deeper understanding of the investigated construct emerges in the process (Breitmeyer et al. 1993). Failing this, they are liable to undermine the validity of their scholarly work altogether through presenting impressionistic and vague accounts of the research process.

3.1

Incorporating triangulation in an SI expertise study

In the context of my research project triangulation was employed to address two substantially different issues. Table 2 below summarizes the methods and types of raw data generated through the application of this strategy. The first concerned establishing robustness in a retrospective study where different types of raw data (protocol statements, TL output, researcher’s observation notes) had been used to address the problem of memory loss, which is a common threat to validity in delayed retrospection (for a detailed account, see Ivanova 2000). The second was methodological triangulation, which was employed to achieve completeness: to gain a clearer understanding of the quantitative findings through use of qualitative data, and generate new findings regarding the nature of experts’ incidental memory and strategic processing. This enables the research to represent a multiplicity of perspectives and to recognize the unique contribution of the introspective experience of the participants, especially the experts, while offering a more comprehensive picture of

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

SI expertise. So, for example, both retrospection and recall methods were used to access LT-WM encodings, analysed in terms of information related to task-content (recall of ST) and task-performance (monitoring, problems, strategic processing). Table 2. Summary of the multi-method design of the study. Elicitation Method

Data

Analytical techniques

Final Representation

Performance analysis Quasi-experimental

TT Transcripts

Propositional analysis

Objects and entities selectively attended to

Free recall of ST Quasi-experimental

Transcripts of recall

Propositional analysis

LTM representation of ST

Cued recall of SL text Quasi-experimental

Questionnaires (open-ended and closed items)

Discourse and propositional analysis

LTM representation of ST

Retrospection Qualitative

Transcripts

Propositional and discourse analysis

Problem-solution pairs, strategies

Interview: questionanswering Qualitative

Transcripts

Discourse analysis

Macrostrategies, concepts and vocabulary

To address selectivity, quantitative analysis of the TL output provided rich data on how accuracy of performance was affected by specific textual and linguistic cues; it did not, however, generate any explanatory data as to why performance was affected in the specific way recorded in the study. The retrospection and interview, on the other hand, gave voice to the subjects and articulated their perspectives on the decision-making processes. Retrospective comments regarding problems occurring at the comprehension, translation and production stages of SI were plotted against specific solutions in an investigation of the probable causes of accuracy variation, such as norms, task constraints, linguistic knowledge and general heuristics. Similarly, the findings that the experts focused their attention on semantic cues during SI, and that they recalled pragmatically important information (accessed by means of cued recall) as accurately as a control group of listeners, were complemented by retrospective statements showing that while processing STs they had actively sought the “minimum scenario”, or the “who-did-what” structure of the individual ST events. The major challenge in implementing the between-methods design was to achieve a true mixture of perspectives and to balance the various strands of evidence and data in formulating the conclusions of the study. Insofar as the methods were employed to study different facets of SI expertise, it was unproblematic to maintain internal consistency and address concerns of rigour within the epistemology and language of the specific paradigm. In the context of the overall study, however, quantitative findings re-

 Adelina Hild

ceived a greater weight, while qualitative data was cautiously integrated within the quasi-experimental inquiry – an implicit prioritizing, reflecting my predominantly positivist training and the ethos of the department where the study was conducted. While this, in my view, does not compromise the goals of completeness underlying the choice of methodological triangulation, it underscores the real challenges around incorporating mixed methods for ensuring thoroughness and rigour.

4. Standardizing the task: task environment and stimulus selection At the primary stage of any expertise project, the researcher is faced with the critical decision of identifying the tasks which best capture the essence of expert performance (Ericsson & Smith 1991) and transposing these to standardized laboratory conditions. Ericsson (2000/1) emphasizes the urgency and significance of achieving a consensus in IR on “well-defined criteria for representative task conditions” (ibid: 207), i.e. tasks that not only capture the actual conditions of professional interpreting, but also allow expert interpreters to demonstrate their superior performance reliably, clearly and robustly. The ultimate test of standardizing, Ericsson is satisfied, lies in evoking outstanding performance, or, for expert-novice comparisons, in registering a sizeable difference in performance that clearly demonstrates experts’ superiority.

4.1

Representativeness of experimental stimuli

A critical element in this process is the selection of the stimulus, various parameters of which could be potentially manipulated to evoke a sizeable difference in expert-novice comparisons. Following experimental findings indicating that simplified or otherwise altered input can result in failure to elicit superior performance (Gihooly et al. 1988), two authentic conference recordings were singled out after an extensive archive search and were presented to the participants with no modifications other than in length. ST selection criteria and the underlying empirical research are listed in Table 3. Table 3. Stimulus selection criteria and characteristics. Criterion

Stimulus

Rationale

Subject Matter Speed of Delivery Degree of orality

General political text 136 wmp Prepared, improvised, not scripted texts Acoustically clear recording Reports with no intertextual links

Control for specialised knowledge Gerver (1969) Shlesinger (1989), Enkvist (1982)

White Noise Text Type

Gerver (1974) Alexieva (1994)

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

Two conclusions as regards the choice of parameters have emerged upon considering the outcome of the study. Firstly, reliable and significant expert-novice differences were registered even when the factor of background knowledge was controlled for, as in this instance, through selecting general political texts. Secondly, ST length (ca. 600 words) should be recognised as a significant factor limiting novice performance: a pilot study established that it seriously deteriorated in a longer ST version (ca. 1000).

4.2

Standardizing SI task environment

In an effort to approximate standard SI practice, the participants were provided with task briefs containing information about the conference topic and venue prior to the experiment. Furthermore, the opening conference statement was used as a warm-up text. During the de-briefing interview, in response to my request to evaluate how closely the experimental set-up approximated field conditions, some of the experts reflected on the lack of “general ambience” or interpreter-audience interaction, which allegedly affected their level of stress and motivation. Clearly, such intangible aspects of the task are problematic for replication in a laboratory set-up. Although they might be potentially important determinants of everyday human performance (Fitts & Posner 1967), their effect on experts in general and in this particular study is likely to be negligible and is counterbalanced by their ability to control motivation in a variety of settings (Ericsson 1996).

5. Sampling In the classic positivist tradition sampling plays a critical role in validating the scientific process through achieving pre-experimental of equating groups through randomization. In expert-novice comparison, on the other hand, some of the researcher’s control over the process has to be relinquished from the outset of the study. While optimum control is lacking in quasi-experimental designs of this type (Campbell & Stanley 1963), the main issue they raise with regard to sampling is to ensure the internal consistency of the groups which are sampled separately and for maximum contrast. The novices participating in the current study formed a fairly homogenous group at the start of their training, having been pre-selected as part of their admission procedure for high L2 proficiency and self-selected by their motivation to pursue an interpreting career. The selection of experts, in contrast, stumbled across a number of epistemological and pragmatic issues, of which ensuring consistency along the criteria of language dominance and area of specialization was the least problematic, and relatively straightforward to resolve. Pym (1998) touched the core of the problem concerning the attribution of expert status, when he argued that Translation (and Interpreting) Studies lack objective, falsifi-

 Adelina Hild

able criteria for identifying experts: “How did these people become experts? … Are all translators now by definition experts?” Responding to these concerns, Shreve (2000) differentiated between competence and expertise as sets of distinct cognitive structures and mechanisms underlying professional and expert performance respectively. In IR MoserMercer (2000: 340) has advocated a stage-by-stage approach to skill development appropriating the terminology of professional guilds, which reflects the everyday metaphor of expertise as a journey: “their [the trainee interpreters’ – AH] goal is to complete the course as journeymen and to venture out into the world of international conferences to become true experts.” Although the time course of this metamorphosis is not specified here, elsewhere (Hoffman 1997) she speculates that a period of ten years is necessary to reach the final stage on the journey – that of a master interpreter. It is not clear that distinctions among the stages of skill development are being pursued in TS. In IR, for instance, it is not unusual for original experimental reports or secondary sources to neglect to specify the duration of practice (e.g. Sunnari 1995; Kalina 1994); or formulate conclusions regarding the nature of expert processing based on studies involving interpreters with varying professional experience (eight years on average for Dillinger (1989); two years for Liu (2001)) without providing any estimate of their ability to perform at consistently high levels (Ericsson & Smith 1991). This problem is endemic not only to T&I research, but indeed to domains where relative and/or absolute measurement of performance is not mandatory. Medical expertise research, for instance, has confined itself to criteria based on professionalism. In other domains involving competitions with high stakes and established performance criteria (e.g. chess, athletics), identifying outstanding individuals is a trivial task. It is no coincidence that the psychology of expertise has primarily focused on these, endorsing a performance- rather than a professionalism-based definition of expertise: [T]he study of expertise seeks to understand and account for what distinguishes outstanding individuals in a domain from less outstanding individuals in that domain, as well as from people in general (Ericsson & Smith 1991: 2)

What criteria can current SI expertise research apply for designating an interpreter as a superior performer in a situation with limited empirical information and inadequate theoretical models (cf. Shreve 2000)? One criterion, mentioned by Moser-Mercer (2000) is the 10-year rule cited above. Although an empirically established finding, the rule is not a reliable indicator of expertise level, according to Ericsson et al. (1993) who promote instead the concept of deliberate practice – a goal-oriented activity, which integrates progressively increasing levels of difficulty, informative feedback and opportunities for repetition and correction of errors. For the practical purposes of research, however, the concept appears to have limited predictive power and is questionable on grounds of falsifiability (Sternberg 1996). Another approach, applied in social psychology, relies on social evaluation and judgement, elicited by a variety of domain-specific strategies. Stein (1997), for instance, has proposed the method of network analysis, which identifies experts among profes-

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

sionals by analysing the types and density of relationships among individuals within their professional context. The strategy applied in the current experiment consisted in eliciting professional judgement from two independent sources: translation agencies and an interpretertrainer for an MA course in Conference Interpreting Techniques. They were asked to short-list the ten outstanding simultaneous interpreters, who were then approached to participate in the experiment. With a response rate close to 75%, the expert group comprised 9 individuals with an average experience of nine years. The group was not pretested. Their performance was holistically examined once the experiment was completed and prior to analysis of raw data in a routine procedure to identify outliers. It was at this stage of the research process, that a) the overall homogeneity of the group was empirically verified by the uniformly high TT quality; and b) the data from one participant – a veteran interpreter – was identified as an outlier. The performance in question, although superior to that of the novices, and otherwise fluent, was clearly less accurate than the output of the remaining eight experts. Since it fell short of the criterion of reliable and consistent superior performance (Ericsson 2000/1), the data was excluded from further analysis. What lessons could be derived from examining these sampling issues? First, it seems that in order to establish a cumulative tradition in SI expertise research, consistency needs to be exercised in distinguishing between experts and experienced professionals in research and theoretical writing. Second, insofar as this distinction is based on elicited independent judgement (a reasonable and workable alternative in the absence of performance evaluation models), this needs to be verified by pre-experimental tests of performance (cf. Ericsson 2000/1) in order to reduce experimental mortality. On a more general methodological level, the sampling experience related above underscores the urgency of Shreve’s (2000) plea for developing overall performance models with specified requirements and thresholds for each stage of skill development.

6. Ensuring consistency and reliability in data handling Concerns with potential distortions in data handling and analysis in the context of establishing experimental rigour have been voiced by representatives of both quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Reflected by the criteria of objectivity and reliability of coding (adopted by the quantitative paradigm) or the comparable non-positivist concepts of dependability and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba 1985; Lincoln 1995), they have led to the adoption of paradigm-specific strategies for demonstrating lack of bias, some of which were employed in the present study and will be discussed briefly in this section. The need to uphold consistency and goodness in data handling in this project were underscored by the numerous manipulations to which the raw verbal data (recordings of SI, recall, retrospective and interviews) was subjected: transcription, seg-

 Adelina Hild

mentation, transformation into numerical data, statistical and protocol analyses. Procedures implemented for ensuring robustness of the research process included: – Implementing a VERBMOBIL transcription protocol developed specifically for spontaneous oral discourse and detailing a large array of linguistic and paralinguistic phenomena. – Assessing performance accuracy in terms of four degrees of correspondence (response categories) between model-theoretic ST representations (Asher 1993) and the SI/recall output, subsumed in turn under the superordinate categories of successful and unsuccessful responses (see Figure 1). The four response categories provided more detailed information on the different types of processing in SI, more specifically inference-generation (reflected in the categories of paraphrase and error), which was deemed particularly useful for analysing cue-guided selectivity in expert SI. Successful Strict Correspondence C

Unsuccessful Paraphrase

Error

Omission

P

E

O

Figure 1. Structure of response categories for SI and recall accuracy assessment.

– Assessing reliability of accuracy estimates by means of descriptive statistics on scoring by five independent raters, which provide explicit results regarding the types and sources of inter-rater disagreement. This transparency and the unique common-sense of the raw agreement indices could be considered a viable alternative for multi-category accuracy estimates, rather than correlation (Tommola & Lindholm 1995) or Kappa statistics (Liu 2001), usually computed for ratings of dichotomous categories. – Explicitness about data handling in SI retrospection. Decreasing bias in the analysis of SI retrospective protocols was a challenge in this project, since hiring multiple or naïve coders was not a viable option. The adopted procedure involved: a) generating two separate codings of all retrospective protocols (separated by an interval of several weeks); b) comparing them for consistency; c) presenting the differently encoded statements to an independent rater for coding. Similar approaches have been promulgated in qualitative meta-discourse for establishing consistency and transparency in data handling: checking and re-checking of data or conducting audits that examine the collection and analysis procedures and conclude with an estimate of the bias potential. Any one of the above solutions is exceedingly time- and resource-consuming, particularly when the analysis focuses on complete protocols rather than on selected seg-

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

ments and features thereof. Notwithstanding, practical and theoretical consideration of these issues is essential if we wish to avoid the danger of sounding impressionistic and fragmented, and to give our findings the weight of consistency and rigour which lend credence to our research outside our own domain.

7. Conclusion In this paper I have addressed some challenges to demonstrating rigour in a design where qualitative and quantitative methods intersect. Methodological triangulation as a strategy for establishing completeness and gaining a deeper understanding of the complexity of SI expertise was critically examined in the context of an investigation of SI discourse processing. Whilst it contributed thoroughness and consistency of findings, its application in the study raised concerns over the practical aspects of achieving a “true mixture of perspectives” (Tobin & Begley 2002), where the epistemological precepts and methodological requirements of both paradigms are recognized and equally valued. Rigour and goodness of research were interpreted in this study as a requirement for explicitness along each stage of the process. These criteria were foremost in the discussion of critical points from the research design, namely, identification of experts and standardizing of the SI task. While some of the design solutions discussed above are temporary bridges enabling research to span the hiatus of knowledge or findings (most notably in the area of performance measurement models), others might serve to promote and facilitate further research. Among the latter are findings that help identify the factors affecting reproduction of expertise under controlled laboratory conditions. With the increased interest in applying qualitative methods to the investigation of interpreting and translation processes, the need to address the problem of rigour both in meta-discourse and within each individual investigation acquires greater urgency. Methods for assessing quality and robustness of qualitative inquiry could be gleaned from studies generated in a variety of disciplines (e.g. education, social psychology, health research). It is essential, however, to initiate and sustain an intra-disciplinary debate which would enable further clarity regarding the criteria for validating our research.

References Alexieva, Bistra. 1994. “Text types and intertextuality in simultaneous interpreting”. In Translation Studies – An Interdiscipline, M. Snell-Hornby, F. Pöchhacker and K. Kaindl (eds), 179–189. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Alves, Fabio (ed.). 2003. Triangulating Translation: Perspective in Process Oriented Research. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

 Adelina Hild Anderson, Linda. 1994. “Simultaneous interpreting: Contextual and translation aspect.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, S. Lambert and B. Moser-Mercer (eds), 101–121. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Arminio, Jan and Hultgren, Francine. 2002. “Breaking out from the shadow: the question of criteria in qualitative research”. Journal of College Student Development 43(4): 446–456. Aroni, Rosalie, Goeman Dianne, Steward, Kay, Sawer, Susan, Abramson, Michael and Thein, Frank. 1999. Concepts of Rigour: When Methodological, Clinical and Ethical Issues Intersect. Paper presented at The First AQR Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Available on-line at http://www. latrobe.edu.au//www/aqr/offer/papers/RAroni.hmt (retrieved October 10, 2005). Asher, Nicholas. 1993. Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Breitmeyer, Bruno, Ayres, Linda and Knafl, Kathleen. 1993. “Triangulation in qualitative research: Evaluation of completeness and confirmation purposes”. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship 25 (3): 237–243. Campbell, Donald T. and Stanley, Julian C. 1963. Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing. Chase, Walter and Simon, Herbert. 1973. “The mind’s eye in chess”. In Visual Information Processing, W. G. Chase (ed.), 215–281. New York: Academic Press. Denzin, Norman K. and Lincoln, Yvonna. 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA. Dillinger, Mike. 1989. Component Processes of Simultaneous Interpreting. McGill University, Canada (unpublished PhD thesis). Enkvist, Nils. 1982. “Impromptu speech, structure and process”. In Impromptu speech: A Symposium, N. Enkvist (ed.), 222–237. Abo: Research Institute of the Abo Academy. Ericsson, K. Anders. 1996. “The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues”. In The Road to Excellence: Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports and Games, K.A. Ericsson (ed.), 1–51. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ericsson, K. Anders. 2000/1. “Expertise in Interpreting: An expert-performance perspective”. Interpreting, 5(2): 187–220. Ericsson, K. Anders and Delaney, Peter. 1999. “Long-term working memory as an alternative to capacity models of working memory in everyday skilled performance”. In Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control, A. Miyake & P. Shah (eds), 257–298. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ericsson, K. Anders and Kintsch, Walter. 1995. “Long-term working memory”. Psychological Review, 102: 211–245. Ericsson, K. Anders and Smith, Jacqui. 1991. “Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction”. In Toward a General Theory of Expertise, K.A. Ericsson and J. Smith (eds), 1–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ericsson, K. Anders, Krampe, Robert and Tesch-Römer, Clemens. 1993. “The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance”. Psychological Review, 100(3): 363–406. Fitts, Paul and Posner, Michael. 1967. Human performance. Belmont CA: Brooks-Cole. Gerver, David. 1969. “The effect of source language presentation rate on the performance of simultaneous conference interpreters”. In Proceedings of 2nd Louisville Conference on Rate and/or Controlled Speech, F. Foulke (ed.), 162–183. University of Louisville. Gerver, David. 1974. “The effects of noise on the performance of simultaneous interpreters, Accuracy of performance”. Acta Psychologica, 38: 159–167.

A between-methods investigation of SI expertise 

Gilhooly, Kenneth J., Wood, Michael, Kinnear, Paul. R. and Green, Caroline. 1988. “Skill in map reading and memory for maps”. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 40A: 87–107 Hoffman, Robert. 1997. “The cognitive psychology of expertise and the domain of interpreting”. Interpreting 2(1 /2): 189–230. Ivanova, Adelina 1999. Discourse Processing During Simultaneous Interpreting: An Expertise Approach. University of Cambridge, UK (unpublished PhD thesis). Ivanova, Adelina. 2000. “The use of retrospection in research on simultaneous interpreting”. In Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting, S. Tirkkonen-Condit & R. Jaaskelainen (eds), 27–53. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Jick, Todd D. 1979. “Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action”. Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 602–611. Kalina, Silvia. 1994. “Analysing interpretation performance: Methods and problems”. In Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims and Vision, C. Dollerup and A. Lindegaard (eds), 225–232. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Lincoln, Yvonna. 1995. “Emerging criteria for qualitative and interpretative research”. Qualitative Inquiry 3: 275–289. Lincoln, Yvonna and Guba, Egon. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Liu, Minhua. 2001. Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Working Memory Analysis. University of Texas at Austin, USA (unpublished PhD thesis). Massey, Alexander 1999. “Methodological triangulation, or how to get lost without being found”. In Exploration in Methodology, Studies in Educational Ethnography, A. Massey and G. Walford (eds), 183–197. Stamford: JAI Press. Miles, Matthew and Huberman, A. Michael. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis. Newbury Park, CA:Sage. Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 2000. “The rocky road to expertise in interpreting: Eliciting knowledge from learners”. In Translationswissenschaft: Festschrift fuer Mary Snell-Hornby zum 60. Geburtstag, M. Kadric, K. Kaindl and F. Pöchhacker (eds), 339–352. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. PACTE. 2003. “Building a translation competence model”. In Triangulating Translation: Perspective in Process-Oriented Research, F. Alves (ed.), 78–102. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pym, Anthony. 1998. “Ideologies of the expert in discourses on translator-training”. Available on-line at http://www.fut.es/~pym/students/menus.html (retrieved October 10, 2005). Shlesinger, Miriam. 1989. Simultaneous Interpretation as a Factor in Effecting Shifts in the Position of Texts on the Oral-Literate Continuum. Tel Aviv University, Israel (unpublished MA thesis). Shreve, Gregory M. 2000. “Knowing translation: Cognitive and experiential aspects of translation expertise from the perspective of expertise studies”. In Translation Studies: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline, A. Riccardi (ed.), 150–171 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stein, Erik W. 1997. “A look at expertise from a social perspective”. In Expertise in Context: Human and Machine, P. J. Feltovich, K. M. Ford & R. R. Hoffman (eds), 181–194. Manlo Park, CA: AAAI. Sternberg, Robert J. 1996. “Costs of expertise”. In The Road to Excellence: Acquisition of Expert Performance in the Arts and Sciences, Sports and Games, K. A. Ericsson (ed.), 347–355. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Sunnari, Marianna 1995. “Processing strategies in simultaneous interpreting: Saying it all vs. synthesis”. In Topics in Interpreting Research, J. Tommola (ed.), 109–121. Turku: University of Turku.

 Adelina Hild Tobin, Gerard A. and Begley, Cecil. 2002. “Triangulation as a method of inquiry”. Journal of Critical Inquiry into Curriculum and Instruction 3(3): 7–11. Tommola, Jorma and Lindholm, Johan. 1995. “Experimental research on interpreting: Which dependent variable?”. In Topics in Interpreting Research, J. Tommola (ed.), 121–135. Turku: University of Turku.

part 3

Empirical Research

Translation revision A study of the performance of ten professional translators revising a legal text1 Alexander Künzli Stockholm University, Sweden

This paper presents some results from an empirical study on translation revision. Ten professional translators were asked to think aloud while revising three texts that had been translated from French into German. The quality of the revised translations was assessed by a subject-matter expert for each text. The focus of the analysis was on investigating on the one hand the changes the revisers made in the draft translations, or their failures to make changes; and on their task definition on the other hand. We will present here only the results from the revision of one text, a legal one. The study sheds light on revision as a distinct and hitherto often neglected component of the overall process of producing translations.

Keywords: translation revision, quality assessment, think-aloud protocols, professional translators, legal translation

1. Conceptual frame of reference This paper presents some results from a research project on translation revision. Ten professional translators were asked to revise three texts that had been translated from French into German. Revision is defined here, in analogy with Mossop (2001: 169), as the process in which a person other than the translator checks a draft translation for errors and makes any necessary changes. The overall aim of the project is to investigate the following questions: How do revisers define their task? To what extent do they make the draft translations better? How much time do they invest? It is very common in the translation business that translations are revised by a person other than the translator. According to surveys reported by Horguelin and Brunette (1998: 10) and Arthern (1983: 53), most translations produced within international or-

 Alexander Künzli

ganizations are revised. However, translation revision is costly in time and money. As a result of the budgetary restrictions forced on international organizations during the past 15 years or so, its use in practice has increasingly been questioned and translators are encouraged to rely on self-revision. A contrary development can be observed on the private market. Under the aegis of the European Committee for Standardization, the European Association of Translation Companies has published a quality standard for translation services (EN-15038. European Quality Standard for Translation Services). This standard recognizes separate roles for translators and revisers: every translation must be revised first by the translator and then by a second person. This means that the demand for translation revision will probably grow rather than diminish. The essential role played by revision has been recognized relatively late in Translation Studies. It is only recently that researchers have started to study translation revision in its own right. In what follows, I will give a brief overview of the relevant research conducted so far. Since one may assume that self-revision has some similarities with revising someone else’s translation, I will start with a presentation of studies that investigate how translators revise their own texts. Self-revision has been studied as a distinct phase in the translation process in several think-aloud protocol studies (e.g., Breedveld 2002; Jääskeläinen 1999; Krings 1986; Séguinot 1997). Complementing the use of think-aloud protocols with keystroke logging, Englund Dimitrova (2005) has illustrated the important role played by selfrevision in the shaping of the final target text, especially in achieving an appropriate linguistic distance to the source text once a literal translation has been produced during the main writing phase. This finding has been confirmed by Shih (in press) in an interview study designed to investigate what self-revision means to practising translators. Drawing on findings from writing research, Englund Dimitrova (2005: 23) also highlights the important role played by the participant’s task definition in the execution of complex tasks such as translation in general and self-revision in particular. According to Hayes (2004: 11–12), the reviser’s task definition specifies (1) the goals for revision, (2) the scope of the revision, and (3) the procedures to be used. This task definition is considered to be fundamental and strategic. It is supposed to guide the whole revision process and to determine the sequence of sub-processes: evaluation, strategy selection, and realization of changes in the written text. Translation revision, i.e., revising somebody else’s draft translation, has been mostly addressed from a pedagogical or practical perspective (Horguelin & Brunette 1998; Mossop 2001). However, a few empirical studies have also investigated how effective revision is. Arthern (1983) assessed the quality of revisions done by revisers working in the EC Translation Department. Even if their work was globally assessed as good, all revisers were shown to make unnecessary revisions. More recently, Lorenzo (2002) has studied how trainee translators revise both their own translations and those of fellow trainees. The results are, as Lorenzo (2002: 155) points out, somewhat alarming: the greater the effort, in terms of the time spent on the task and the number of changes made, the worse they make the draft translations. When it comes to revising

Translation revision 

fellow trainees’ draft translations, the results are similar. While some trainees’ work is characterized by a relatively high proportion of under-revisions, other trainees make a large number of hyper-revisions (unnecessary changes) and over-revisions (introducing errors into the translation). Finally, Brunette et al. (2005) compared the efficiency of monolingual revision (revision without the source text) and bilingual revision. Even if bilingual revision was shown to yield better results, it gave rise to a large number of over-revisions and under-revisions. The tendency towards hyper- and over-revision observed in these studies is interesting not least because course books on translation revision stress the importance of the principle of justification: revisers must be able to justify all changes so as to avoid making changes solely motivated by personal preferences (Horguelin & Brunette 1998: 44; Mossop 2001: 149). The studies mentioned above approach translation revision from a product point of view. In order to better understand what may have triggered a change or the failure to correct an error, we need to investigate the mental processes of the actual work of revising. Think-aloud protocols (TAPs) seem particularly promising for such a study. TAPs consist in asking a participant to verbalize all his or her thoughts and reactions during the performance of a task. TAPs have been used for 20 years or so as a method for investigating the cognitive and affective dimensions of translation (e.g., Jääskeläinen 1999; Krings 1986; Künzli 2003). They have not yet been applied to the study of translation revision (i.e., of revising others). I have therefore decided to adopt a combined approach. Through linguistic analysis, I study external revision, i.e., the changes actually made and the changes that should have been made; and through TAP analysis, I study internal revision, i.e., what the reviser formulates mentally while he or she is working on a specific text passage. Since findings from writing research illustrate the pivotal role played by the reviser’s task definition, it seems reasonable to start by focusing on this component when analyzing the think-aloud protocols.

2. Method Ten professional translators with German as their active language were recruited as participants. They were asked to revise three German translations of three French source texts while thinking aloud. The source texts used were (1) a judicial decision, (2) an instruction manual, and (3) a direct-mail advertisement. As mentioned, I will only deal here with some results from the revision of the legal text. In a second step, the quality of the draft translations and the revised translations was assessed by a subject-matter expert for each of the three texts. The expert asked to evaluate the legal texts holds a degree in both translation and law. She has been working as a teacher of legal translation for more than twenty years. She was asked to identify: (1) instances of justified changes, i.e., changes that actually result in a quality enhancement of the text, (2) instances of hyper-revision, i.e., unnecessary changes, (3)

 Alexander Künzli

instances of over-revision, i.e., the introduction of errors into the translation, and (4) instances of under-revision, i.e., failure to correct errors in the draft translation. Finally, the changes made by the revisers in the draft translations or their failures to make a change were related to the relevant verbalizations in their TAPs in order to investigate the participants’ task definition. By task definition, I mean here verbalizations stating explicit goals for revision or comments on the procedures followed to achieve these goals. The data show that the participants did verbalize explicit revision goals, such as “I am not supposed to change things that are actually OK”. It also appeared useful to take into account verbalizations that contained evaluations, for two reasons. First, translation research has shown that an analysis of what translators consider good or bad in a translation allows inferences to be made regarding their translation principles or task definition (see, e.g., Englund Dimitrova 2005; Tirkkonen-Condit & Laukkanen 1996). Second, writing research has identified evaluation, which includes the detection and diagnosis of problems, as one of the main sub-processes of text revision (Alamargot & Chanquoy 2001: chap. 3; Hayes 2004). Evaluations can thus be seen as local indicators of the reviser’s task definition.

3. Results 3.1

Different types of revision

Let us start by looking at some results from a product perspective. Table 1 gives the frequency and distribution of the number of revisions and under-revisions in the draft translations. Table 1. Frequency and distribution of revisions and under-revisions. Justified change Allegra Chiara Emma Lisa Madeleine Nina Sarah Timea Valeria Yannic Total

15 16 17 3 7 10 19 11 7 20 125

44% 42% 38% 15% 37% 53% 54% 28% 30% 61% 41%

Hyper-revision 7 14 14 2 0 0 7 12 5 1 62

21% 37% 31% 10% 0% 0% 20% 30% 22% 3% 20%

Over-revision 5 0 5 2 0 0 2 9 2 6 31

15% 0% 11% 10% 0% 0% 6% 23% 9% 18% 10%

Under-revision 7 8 9 13 12 9 7 8 9 6 88

21% 21% 20% 65% 63% 47% 20% 20% 39% 18% 29%

Total 34 38 45 20 19 19 35 40 23 33 306

Translation revision 

The results show that some participants made quite a lot of changes. What is more: certain changes may involve several textual-linguistic manipulations, but may have been counted as only one change by the subject-matter expert. For example, the change of the draft-translation segment eine Wiederherstellung eines Klimas des Vertrauens to eine Wiederherstellung des Vertrauensverhältnisses was counted as one change, even if it actually involved three textual-linguistic manipulations (see Chesterman 1997/2000: chap. 4 for the concept of textual-linguistic manipulation): (1) phrase structure change (the indefinite article eines is changed into the definite article des), (2) distribution change (the noun phrase with genitive attribute Klimas des Vertrauens is changed into the compound noun Vertrauensverhältnisses), and (3) synonymy (selection of the term Verhältnis instead of Klima). Some interesting observations can be made with respect to the distribution of the revisions made. All in all, the percentage of hyper-revisions and over-revisions reached 30%. In other words: nearly one change in three is either unnecessary or even consists in introducing an error into the draft translation. Moreover, some of the latter errors are not what could possibly be regarded as minor linguistic errors in spelling, but serious errors in meaning. Some revisers’ work is also characterized by under-revision. In Lisa’s case, the percentage of failures to notice errors in the draft translation reached 65%. Below are some examples of hyper-revisions, over-revisions and under-revisions. Only the segments in bold typeface are analyzed. Let us start with an example of over-revision: (1) French original: […] qui s’étaient joints à elle pour solliciter l’intervention de Me X. Yannic’s translation: […] der sich ihrer Bitte um Zugzug von RA X angeschlossen hatte.

Yannic’s translation contains a spelling error: it should say Zuzug, not Zugzug. The over-revision below consists in introducing a serious error in meaning: (2) French original: Tout indique en effet que cette assemblée […] n’a pas été renvoyée parce que le quorum n’avait pas été atteint pour des causes fortuites, mais parce que […] Emma’s translation: Denn alles weist darauf hin, dass diese Versammlung […] nicht deshalb nicht verschoben wurde, weil das Quorum zufällig nicht erreicht wurde, sondern weil […] The original sentence in French is very long (79 words) and complex. Several revisers introduced errors into this sentence when trying to make it what they considered more readable. The original says that the meeting has been postponed; Emma’s translation says that it has not. Below is one example of hyper-revision:

(3) Draft translation: […] die Anstalten, die die Verwalterin traf, […] Yannic’s translation: […] die Vorkehrungen, welche die Verwalterin traf, […] German-speakers often avoid the relative pronoun der, die, das when it stands right in front of the definite article der, die, das. They may then replace it with welcher, welche,

 Alexander Künzli

welches, the motive being to make the reading flow better. However, it is difficult to reliably assess to what extent there is a general consensus in matters like these. Therefore, it was decided that the information and recommendations given in grammars, style guides and dictionaries would be used as the basis for the categorizations. As the Duden: Richtiges und gutes Deutsch states that the relative pronoun welcher is awkward and should be avoided in contemporary German even in the above case, this change was categorized as a hyper-revision. Finally, below is one example of under-revision: (4) French original: Mais surtout, ce qui s’est passé le 28 décembre 2000 […] German draft translation: Aber vor allem das, was am 28. Dezember passiert ist, […] Lisa’s translation: Aber vor allem das, was am 28. Dezember passierte, […] As can be seen, the year 2000 is omitted both in the draft translation and in Lisa’s translation. However in a legal text, this type of information must be considered essential.

3.2

Time and quality

A further interesting question is the relationship between time and quality: to what extent is the amount of time spent on the revision task associated with an improvement in the quality of the revised translation? Table 2. Relationship between time, quality, and task order. Name Allegra Chiara Emma Lisa Madeleine Nina Sarah Timea Valeria Yannic

Time1 7 6 8 1 4 3 9 5 1 10

Quality2 9 4 10 6 3 5 1 11 8 2

Task Order3 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 1

Ranking according to time spent on the task. 1 = participant spending the least time, 10 = participant spending the most time.

1

Ranking according to quality. 1 = participant producing best translation, 11 = participant producing least good translation, 7 = ranking of the draft translation.

2

The participants were free to revise the three texts in the order they wished (1 = the legal text was revised first).

3

Translation revision 

The column Time in Table 2 shows that Lisa and Valeria were quickest to carry out the revision task. The participants who spent most time on the task were Sarah and Yannic. From a purely financial point of view, the client would not want either Sarah or Yannic to revise the draft translation. But the question is whether it would be time and money well spent. The columns Time and Quality indicate that the two participants who spent the most time on the revision task turned out the best translations. Yannic and Sarah were also the only participants whose translations were considered acceptable by the subjectmatter expert after some minor changes in terminology and style. The table shows furthermore that 4 participants actually made the draft translation worse. One of them, Emma, is ranked third in the time spent on the revision task. These observations suggest that quality takes time, but that spending a lot of time on a revision task does not necessarily amount to the same thing as being able to provide quality in translation revision. The revisers’ performances also seem to be related to their degree of motivation. As mentioned, the participants were free to choose the order in which to revise the three texts. One may assume that a participant who revised the legal text last will probably have felt more tired and hence less motivated than one who started with the legal text. The columns Quality and Task Order in Table 2 reveal that all the participants who started by revising the legal text are among those who made the draft translation better. Conversely, both participants who revised the legal text last (Timea and Valeria) and probably felt more tired and less motivated are among those who made the draft translation worse. The hypothesis of a relationship between motivation and performance is strengthened by the think-aloud protocols.

3.3

Think-aloud protocol analysis

As mentioned, several participants produced verbalizations that can be interpreted as explicit indicators of their task definition. The following examples testify to this (I have translated the verbalizations into English; however, source-text and target-text segments verbalized by the participants in French and German have been retained and italicized):

(5) [Allegra] zugegen well zugegen is OK after all you’re not supposed to change things that / that actually are OK

(6) [Sarah] well it’s not my job to retranslate but only / to get rid of blunders and / errors made by my colleague

(7) [Lisa] it’s better to translate too little than too much I mean to change too little than too much

In the excerpts above, the participants declare that they believe they should refrain from making unnecessary changes. Excerpt (7) contains an interesting slip of the tongue. It may be interpreted as revealing a discrepancy that seems to be quite common among the participants: on the one hand, an awareness that they are not sup-

 Alexander Künzli

posed to retranslate but only to make any necessary changes; on the other hand, a revising behaviour that runs counter to this awareness. Instead of saying that it is her job to revise, Lisa starts by saying that it is her job to translate. The inclination towards hyper-revision, i.e., making unnecessary changes, is illustrated in the evaluation in example (8):

(8) [Chiara] passées naturellement / wenn alles / normal / (she sighs) wenn alles / normal it’s not exactly terrific either but

Excerpt (8) shows that Chiara changes the original translator’s wording mit rechten Dingen (an equivalent for the French naturellement) into normal. Although she is not entirely satisfied with her solution, she makes a change. This could be because the goal or procedure she is following is to ask herself if something can be changed rather than if it needs to be changed. As mentioned, trainers in translation revision agree on one point: revisers have to be able to justify all changes so as to avoid making changes motivated only by personal preferences (Horguelin & Brunette 1998; Mossop 2001). Seen from this perspective, Chiara has created an inappropriate task definition. Excerpt (9) is an illustration of a tendency towards over-revision:

(9) [Valeria] what is actually meant by dispositif? since I don’t know / I’d / take um something neutral

Valeria changes the draft-translation segment Anstalten (an equivalent for the French dispositif) into Vorrichtung, a term considered to be too concrete by the subject-matter expert. She does so although she is uncertain, as several linguistic uncertainty markers indicate. These verbalizations raise the question if some revisers, rather than creating an inappropriate task definition, have not specified a goal for their revision at all. The following excerpt shows Yannic’s specific way of evaluating draft-translation segments: (10) [Yannic] illusoire illusorisch what else is there? / I would have expected something else (he consults a dictionary) / illusorisch trügerisch / illusorisch / well trügerisch but that’s not quite correct either / unwirklich / well after all it does say illusoire so / I would have expected hinfällig but then it should say caduc which means that illusorisch geworden waren / is OK Yannic indicates what he would have expected in place of the original translator’s decision. He says he would have expected hinfällig rather than illusorisch as a translation of the French source-text segment illusoire. He checks his solution in a dictionary. He also tries a back-translation into French and finally decides that it is not necessary to make a change. This behaviour appears systematically in his TAP. The data suggest that Yannic may be working harder than other participants to evaluate both the draft translation and his own tentative changes. This behaviour is time-consuming, but also associated with a quality enhancement of the text and a low percentage of hyper-revisions.

Translation revision 

A further specificity in Yannic’s revising behaviour emerges from the following excerpt: (11) [Yannic] an awful lot of changes / are they really all necessary? Yannic is the only participant who dedicates an entire phase of his revision to evaluating the appropriateness of every single change made in the draft translation. He does so by using the “Reviewing” function in Microsoft Word. One might therefore wonder whether some instances of hyper-revision found in the data of other participants can be explained at least in part by the fact that not all of them have acquired efficient procedures for evaluating and making changes. Excerpt (12) illustrates Timea’s tendency to evaluate draft-translation segments and tentative changes by manifesting a lack of motivation: (12) [Timea] traf / sie neue / Massnahmen / I couldn’t care less […] dass das Quorum hätte erreicht werden können / at least it’s comprehensible let’s leave it like this because I’m fed up […] verfügt / I don’t care Table 2 revealed that Timea is one of the two participants who revised the judicial decision as the third and last text. Moreover, her translation was considered the least good. The think-aloud protocol strengthens the hypothesis that failure to revise efficiently may be explained at least in part by the reviser’s fatigue and lack of motivation. Excerpt (13) below illustrates a further central issue in translation revision: the problem that arises if the reviser does not work to an adequate revision brief: (13) [Madeleine] fin de non-recevoir / that’s a a legal term I mean I’d have to look it up too / I suppose / that they chose the right term / but I’d have to invest more time / or know exactly that the text has really been translated by a um a / a trustworthy legal translator / because / I have never seen this fin de nonnon-recevoir / schriftlich Nichteintreten At least in real-life freelance revision, revisers very often get the same brief and information as the original translator. But the reviser may also want to know if he or she can trust the original translator when it comes to the accuracy of the technical terms, as Madeleine states in excerpt (13) during the evaluation of the target-text segment Nicht eintreten. This is especially true when they are working to a tight deadline, because in that case they may not be able to check all parameters of a draft translation. Therefore, they will want to know on what parameters to concentrate. Finally, excerpt (14) extends the discussion towards the social dimension of translation revision. It contains Sarah’s verbalizations during the evaluation of a technical term: (14) [Sarah] but I must not get bogged down with this problem or else / my revising will get much too expensive […] but it’s my problem I would not even bill the client for this for the fact that I’ve been stuck here for so much time

 Alexander Künzli

These verbalizations reveal that revisers are very well aware of the fact that time is money. Speedy delivery and low production costs have become essential criteria of translation quality. Not without good reason, Horguelin and Brunette (1998: Chapter 3.1.3) mention profitability as one of the five parameters that must be taken into account in translation revision. The above excerpt shows that revisers may hesitate to bill the client for the actual time they have spent. In other words: they appear sometimes ready to sacrifice themselves out of loyalty towards the other actors in the overall translational equation. This tendency manifests itself in other parts of the material, too (Künzli 2006a).

4. Discussion and implications The present study shows that when professional translators are asked to revise draft translations, the proportion of unjustified changes as well as that of failures to correct errors in the draft translation can be quite high. It also indicates that quality takes time, but that time is not sufficient to achieve quality in translation revision. Finally, the data illustrate the role played by the reviser’s (lack of) motivation in his or her performance. The tendency to make unnecessary changes has been found by other scholars too (Arthern 1983; Brunette et al. 2005; Lorenzo 2002). However, the TAP analysis conducted in the present project offers some possible explanations for these findings. It reveals that there is, in some cases, a discrepancy between verbalized task definition and actual behaviour: one and the same participant may very well declare in the beginning that his or her job is only to make any necessary changes. Later, however, they may impose their own linguistic preferences at the expense of the original translator’s decisions. In other words, there seems to be a gradual shift during the revision task from the explicit task definition verbalized at the beginning (“ask yourself if something has to be changed!”) to the goal or procedure actually followed later in the process (“ask yourself if something can be changed!”). Moreover, the TAPs not only suggested that failure to revise efficiently is, at least in part, the result of an inappropriate task definition. They also showed that hyper-revision may be due to an absence of well-structured revision procedures. Dedicating a revision phase solely to evaluating the appropriateness of every single change seems to lower the risk of unnecessary changes. Let me finish by looking at possible implications and future directions. When it comes to theory, the development of a model for successful translation revision seems particularly interesting. Such a model will have to take into account not only fundamental revision sub-processes (evaluation, strategy selection, realization of changes), but also a control structure (such as the task definition), the reviser’s knowledge base, his or her motivation and, finally, situational factors. The role played by affective factors such as motivation has received little attention in translation process research (see, however, Jääskeläinen 1999). Likewise, Alamargot and Chanquoy (2001: 14–18) have shown that in writing research, revision models have neglected the writer’s motivation.

Translation revision 

Their suggestion for more research into the role played by motivation in the activation of revision processes therefore does certainly apply to translation revision, too. Moreover, I would like to stress the need to take into consideration within-subject variability. Even if some participants’ performances did not rank very high, their revised translations and their verbalizations do of course indicate that they managed to activate certain types of knowledge and competencies. In the present project, the participants were asked to carry out three tasks. The need to take into account variability appears clear. To give just two examples: Timea, whose performance in the revision of the legal text was assessed as poorest, was ranked 1st by the evaluator of the advertising text (Künzli 2006a); Emma, on the other hand, was ranked 1st in the revision of the technical text (Künzli 2006b), but only 10th in the revision of the legal text. The next step will be to investigate more systematically the factors underlying this large variability in the revisers’ performances. Finally, the project also has possible practical implications. The study of how translations are being revised is very relevant to translator training. A look at the services offered by translators shows that most translators-to-be will actually work in parallel as revisers. They need to know the principles and develop the competences on which professional revision relies.

Note 1. Research support from the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation (Reg.no. J2004–0368) is gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank Birgitta Englund Dimitrova and an anonymous reviewer for their comments on a draft version, and Katherine Stuart for editing my English.

References Alamargot, Denis and Chanquoy, Lucile. 2001. Through the models of writing. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Arthern, Peter J. 1983. “Judging the quality of revision”. Lebende Sprachen, 2: 53–57. Breedveld, Hella. 2002. “Writing and revising processes in professional translation”. Across Languages and Cultures, 3(1): 91–100. Brunette, Louise, Gagnon, Chantal, & Hine, Jonathan. 2005. “The GREVIS project: Revise or court calamity”. Across Languages and Cultures, 6(1): 29–45. Chesterman, Andrew. 2000 [1997]. Memes of translation. The spread of ideas in translation theory. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta. 2005. Expertise and explicitation in the translation process. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Hayes, John R. 2004. “What triggers revision?” In Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes, L. Allal, L. Chanquoy and P. Largy (eds), 9–20. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Horguelin, Paul A. and Brunette, Louise. 1998. Pratique de la révision. Brossard, Québec: Linguatech.

 Alexander Künzli Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1999. Tapping the process: An exploratory study of the cognitive and affective factors involved in translating [University of Joensuu Publications in the Humanities 22]. Joensuu: University of Joensuu. Krings, Hans P. 1986. Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht. Eine empirische Untersuchung zur Struktur des Übersetzungsprozesses an fortgeschrittenen Französischlernern. Tübingen: Narr. Künzli, Alexander 2003. Quelques stratégies et principes en traduction technique français-allemand et français-suédois [Cahiers de la recherche 21]. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Department of French, Italian and Classical Languages. Künzli, Alexander. 2006a. “Die Loyalitätsbeziehungen der Übersetzungsrevisorin”. In Übersetzen – Translating – Traduire: Towards a “social turn”?, M. Wolf (ed.), 89–98. Münster/ Hamburg/Berlin/Wien/London: LIT-Verlag. Künzli, Alexander. 2006b. “Translation revision: A study of the performance of 10 professional translators revising a technical text”. In Insights into specialized translation, M. Gotti and S. Šarčević (eds), 195–214. Bern & Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Lorenzo, María Pilar. 2002. “Competencia revisora y traducción inversa”. Cadernos de Tradução, 10: 133–166. Mossop, Brian. 2001. Revising and editing for translators. Manchester: St. Jerome. Séguinot, Candace. 1997. “Accounting for variability in translation”. In Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting, J. H. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, and M. K. McBeath (eds), 104–119. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shih, Claire Y. In press. “Revision from translators’ point of view. An interview study”. Target. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja and Laukkanen, Johanna. 1996. “Evaluations – A key towards understanding the affective dimension of translational decisions”. Meta 41(1): 45–59.

Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading1 Cecilia Alvstad University of Oslo, Norway

This paper suggests that close reading of translations and their source texts, in a pedagogical context, can enhance university students’ awareness of literary reading as a dynamic process. The text-oriented work by the German reception theorist Wolfgang Iser (1978) serves as a point of departure. The pedagogical context described is Swedish university teaching of literature, but it is assumed that the basic ideas are relevant also for university teaching in other countries. An example from H. B. Paull’s English translation of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale “The Steadfast Tin-Soldier” is given to illustrate the argument.

Keywords: literary reading, teaching of literature, reception theory, indeterminacy, comparative analysis

1. The teaching context The ideas in this paper originate in a Swedish university teaching context. Therefore, as a background, some information about the Swedish situation is given here. In Swedish universities, literature is studied both in the departments of literature and in the departments of foreign languages (e.g. English, Slavic or Romance Languages). When reading literature originating from other languages, it is read in translation or in the original version depending on the discipline, the university and the source language in question. In the departments of literature, students are often supposed to read English, Norwegian and Danish literature in the original language – which implies that it is considered better to read the original whenever possible. Literature originating from other languages, however, is generally read in translation into Swedish. Research carried out within TS could help students to approach these texts as translations, but TS is seldom part of the curricula at Swedish literature departments. Indeed the awareness

 Cecilia Alvstad

of translational phenomena is low, as is shown for example by the fact that it is seldom indicated which translation of a text students are supposed to read in the cases where a book has been translated several times into Swedish. This points to a contradictory stance towards translations: on the one hand, if you can avoid reading translations you should do so, even if you have not fully mastered the original language (Swedish students of literature cannot generally be called fluent in Danish, Norwegian or even English); yet on the other hand, if you have to read a translation, you can read it as if it were the original, without considering that the translated text is not the source text or that different translations are not identical. It is less common that students of foreign languages read translations as part of their curricula, but this is done when the language is considered to be difficult (for example, Slavic but not Romance languages). Furthermore, in these departments translational issues are not part of the curricula in spite of the fact that interesting secondary literature on the reading of translated literature in a pedagogical context is available (May 1994, Venuti 1996). It should also be noted that these students have a sufficiently thorough knowledge of foreign languages to carry out close readings of parallel texts. In sum, many students read translations as part of their Swedish university studies, without meeting the insights about translation gained within TS. To a scholar in TS, it might appear self-evident that it is problematic to read a translation as if it were the source text, but in many universities this way of reading literary translations is still predominant. The Swedish case is not unique. May (1994) and Venuti (1996) draw attention to the lack of pedagogical theory and practice concerning translated literature in the United States. Similar claims could also be made about the teaching of literature in many other countries. One way of introducing TS into the academic teaching of literature is to bring in translational issues as a way of enhancing goals already expressed in existing curricula.2 Translations, if approached in their full complexity, can promote attention to the formal properties of the text, and this is where the basic claim of the present paper comes in: that the method of comparative analysis can be used as a pedagogical tool, helping students to gain insights in and about literature, e.g. the dynamics of literary reading.3

2. Iser’s approach to reading Reading is a meaning-creating activity in which both a text and a reader are required. Both the text and the reader are relevant in all research on reading, but some scholars dedicate most attention to how the creation of meaning is prepared by the text (e.g. Iser 1978, Jauss 1977, Stierle 1980), whereas other scholars concentrate on real readers (e.g. Fish 1980, Langer 1995, Holland 1975, Rosenblatt 1938, 1978). Text-oriented scholars, most prominently the German reception theorists of the Konstanz school, Iser, Jauss and Stierle, are interested in how literary texts prepare the act of reading. They take into account cultural assumptions, habits of reading, and literary conventions both of

Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading 

the text’s original historical situation and of later reading situations. Iser’s main concern resides in the textual structures that invite the reader to compose meaning during the act of reading. He claims that a literary text never says it all – that there are always gaps or places of indeterminacy in the text, which require the reader to take an active stance towards the text, filling out what is not there. Different readers might fill in textual gaps differently, but the text pre-structures possible ways of filling the gaps. Reading is thus understood as an interaction between the text’s combination of guiding structures and places of indeterminacy, on the one hand, and the reader’s accommodating or self-willed response to these textual structures, on the other. A quote from Iser further illustrates his stance towards the act of reading: The interpreter’s task should be to elucidate the potential meanings of a text, and not to restrict himself to just one. Obviously, the total potential can never be fulfilled in the reading process, but it is this very fact that makes it so essential that one should conceive of meaning as something that happens, for only then can one become aware of those factors that precondition the composition of the meaning. (Iser 1978: 22)

3. Example: the omission of a repetitive textual structure To elucidate Iser’s ideas, a concrete example will be given here. It is a detail in one English translation of a tale by the nineteenth-century Danish writer Hans Christian Andersen. The detail is altered in the translation as compared to the source text, and hence the factors that condition the composition of meaning are changed. Using Iser’s terminology, one could say that this leads to new preconditions for the composition of meaning in the translation as compared to the source text and some other translations. The tale was written in 1838 and is named “The Steadfast Tin-Soldier”. (1) Han saae paa hende og hun saae paa ham, men de sagde ikke noget. (Andersen [1838] 1963: 124, emphasis added)

(2) He looked at her and she looked at him, but they said nothing. (Kingsland, 1959: 159, emphasis added)

(3) He only looked at her and they both remained silent. (Paull [1872])4

The clause “and she looked at him” is omitted in Paull’s translation, and at first sight this might appear unimportant. To make clear why the omission changes the preconditions for the composition of meaning, we have to consider the textual context. The setting of the tale is a house of a bourgeois family, where a boy is given a parcel with 25 tin-soldiers on his birthday. One of these is conspicuous, as he has only one leg. The one-legged tin-soldier lays eyes on another toy, a little lady who is a dancer. She is standing with her leg raised so high in the air that the tin-soldier thinks she, too, has only one leg. He immediately feels very attracted to her. At night, all the toys except

 Cecilia Alvstad

the tin-soldier and the little dancer start to play. A symmetric relationship is created between these two main characters. Both have one leg and neither of them moves. Physically they are steadfast, and this external steadfastness seems to be mirrored by an internal disposition. The reader can follow the tin-soldier’s thoughts through the narrator, but nothing is said about the other character’s inner life. Therefore we do not know anything about the little dancer or her way of relating to the tin-soldier. The text works with oppositions, for instance, between humans and toys, active and passive elements and the external and the internal. It is not only the people of the house that act on their own, but also the toys. As far as the tin-soldier is concerned, the narrator always tells us about him as if he could act on his own, but at the same time the narrator usually gives an external explanation for his movements stressing the fact that he remains steadfast. Thus the tin-soldier’s movements are caused not by himself but by the wind, some playing boys, the water and a fish. Only once is there a clear textual indication of the tin-soldier’s movement without there being an external explanation, and that is when he hides behind a box to be able to look at the little dancer at the beginning of the story. Behind the box the tin-soldier will not take his eyes off the little dancer, in spite of the fact that one of the toys, a little goblin, warns him and tells him not to look at what does not belong to him. The next day the wind (or is it the goblin?) makes the tin-soldier fall out of the window. The tin-soldier is thrown into a series of difficult adventures. Through his trials and tribulations he never stops thinking of the little dancer who has won his heart. Finally, having been swallowed by a fish, the tin-soldier is bought at the market by the family’s maid. Thus he returns to the house and his beloved little dancer. As to the little dancer, it is unclear whether she can act on her own or not. When she is first introduced it is said that “This little lady stretched [Danish strakte] both her arms out, for she was a dancer, and raised [Danish løftede] one leg so high in the air that the tin-soldier could not find it at all, and believed that she had only one leg like himself ” (Kingsland 1959: 155, italics added).5 Interestingly, the Danish verbs, strakte and løftede, can be understood both as indicating a fixed position and as indicating a movement. In any case, a bit further down in the text her fixed position is pointed out, when the symmetric relation between her and the tin-soldier, already indicated by the fact that both appear to have one leg, is given further consistency by their immobility: “There were only two who didn’t move from their places, and they were the tin-soldier and the little dancer: she held herself so upright upon the tip of her toes, with both arms stretched out; he stood just as firmly on his one leg, and his eyes didn’t leave her for a second” (Kingsland 1959: 156).6 Until the very end, the reader remains uncertain about the little dancer’s ability to act on her own. As mentioned above, the reader cannot access her perspective through the narrator. The reader is well aware of the tin-soldier’s interest in her, but knows nothing about her feelings towards him. The character of her feelings towards the tinsoldier can thus be conceived of as a textual gap. Let us turn to the example which

Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading 

elucidates this gap. After his adventures, the tin-soldier is now back in the room where the dancer is. As we have seen above, the Danish original, Kingsland’s and Paull’s translation then read: (4) Han saae paa hende og hun saae paa ham, men de sagde ikke noget. (Andersen [1838] 1963: 124) (5) He looked at her and she looked at him, but they said nothing. (Kingsland, 1959: 159)

(6) He only looked at her and they both remained silent. (Paull [1872])7

This is the first time in the source text that there is a clear reference to the little dancer acting on her own. It is also the first time the readers access the possibility that the little dancer might be a sentient being – or more precisely, here might be a hint about the dancer’s feelings towards the tin-soldier. The omission of “and she looked at him” thus changes the conditions on which the composition of meaning can be based. Until this sentence the attitude of the little dancer towards the tin-soldier has been very unclear, as unclear as her ability to act on her own, that is, to be able to look at him. The clause omitted in Paull’s translation makes clear that she looks at him. Thus, in the original and in Kingsland’s translation this clause is resolving a textual gap. It is made explicit that not only is the tin-soldier aware of the little dancer, but she is aware of him too. In fact, this textual segment opens up the possibility that she is in love with him. This means that the gap is filled in partially, though not completely as the reader cannot be sure about her feelings. However, the reading suggested above is given further consistency a couple of lines further down in the tale, where she looks at him again. The story takes an unexpected turn when one of the little boys throws the tin-soldier into the fire. The tin-soldier is standing in the heat when:

(7) Han saae paa den lille Jomfru, hun saae paa ham, og han følte, han smeltede,

men endnu stod han standhaftig med Geværet i Armen. (Andersen [1838] 1936: 124)

(8) He looked at the little dancer, and she looked at him: he felt himself melting, but he still stood steadfast with his rifle on his shoulder. (Kingsland 1959: 159)

(9) He looked at the little lady, and she looked at him. He felt himself melting away, but he still remained firm with his gun on his shoulder. (Paull 1872)8

In this sentence, almost the same words as in the first example are repeated. This time Paull’s translation is as close to the image presented in the Danish story as Kingsland’s. In spite of this, there is an important difference. In the Danish original and in Kingsland’s translation, the repetition of the formulation draws attention to itself and signals its importance, but not in Paull’s because in her translation there is no repetition since the dancer’s first ‘look’ at the tin-soldier was omitted.

 Cecilia Alvstad

The end of the story is prepared in the sentences discussed above. The tin-soldier is in the fire, melting, when a door suddenly opens and the wind blows the little dancer into the fire as well. In the beginning of the story the wind drove them apart, but in the end it brings them together anew. Once again we can see the repetition as a textual strategy, drawing attention to itself. The indeterminacy about the little dancer’s feelings towards the tin-soldier remains in the end, as the reader never accesses her perspective. Therefore the reader cannot know for sure whether it really was the wind that brought the little lady into the fire or if she herself wanted to go there. The end of the tale is thus very open, and it is even difficult to determine whether the ending is only tragic or also happy, as the two characters are united at last. This kind of ambiguity is typical of Andersen’s work, a distinctive feature of his poetics as compared to earlier tales. Paull’s omission of “she looked at him” the first time it occurs in Andersen’s text erases some of this ambiguity, as it makes the happy ending less feasible. In her translation the reader has no reason to believe that the little dancer willingly joins the tin-soldier in the fire.

4. Pedagogical implications of the example We have seen in the example above how a guiding structure orienting the reader can be rendering ineffective when translated. The formulation “He looked at the little dancer, and she looked at him” is a stylistically marked way of expressing that “they look at each other”, and the fact that it appears twice a few lines apart indicates its importance. Thus, even if the formulation is given once in Paull’s translation, the textual structure that calls the reader’s attention to itself is eliminated. Furthermore, in the indeterminacy of the little dancer’s feelings towards the tinsoldier we have seen one example of a textual gap. This textual gap is filled in, at least partially, in the source text and in Kingsland’s translations by the sentences discussed above. As a consequence of omitting the repetition, Paull’s translation leaves this textual gap open, and this affects the ending of the story. The reason why this omission is assigned importance in the present paper is that it illustrates Iser’s conception of the act of reading as a process where the reader in interaction with the text composes meaning. The translational mode of reading is no exception. In fact, in the results of translators’ readings, i.e. translated texts, it is possible to observe how some potential meanings have been reproduced at the cost of others. Therefore translations can be used as a pedagogical tool helping students to become aware that literary texts have compositional devices which orient the reader and open up for some potential meanings rather than others. As a final consideration it is worth observing that, if comparative analyses of translations are a useful tool for helping students to become aware of the process of reading, it is not a far-fetched idea that the same type of comparisons could also contribute to research on reading. As we have seen above, translations offer first-hand evidence of

Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading 

how source texts have been read. Furthermore, through textual analyses of translated texts, it is possible to study the conception that the translators have of their readers. Therefore translations can be interesting material to study in both text-oriented and reader-oriented research on reading.

Notes 1. This study has been carried out within a project about approaches to literature in academic teaching situations. The project is supported financially by the Swedish Research Council. I wish to thank my fellow members of the project, among them especially Sonia Lagerwall, Ph.D. 2. It is also of interest to introduce the discipline of TS on its own terms, but this is partly another issue. 3. See Venuti (1996: 333) about the claim that the teaching of translation requires close attention to the formal properties of literature. 4. Viggo Hjørnager Pedersen (2004: 187) affirms that Paull’s translations of Andersen’s work are based on Dulcken’s translations into English. He also signals that they are based on other texts, possibly Andersen’s own, other English translations and a German translation or an informant. 5. Andersen’s text reads: “Den lille Jomfru strakte begge sine Arme ud, for hun var en Danserinde, og saa løftede hun sit ene Been saa høit i Veiret, at Tinsoldaten slet ikke kunde finde det og troede, at hun kun havde eet Been ligesom han” (Andersen [1838] 1963: 121–122). According to Hjørnager Pedersen (2004: 274) Jean Hersholt’s translations “must still be regarded as the standard English edition.” In spite of this, the English quotations in this article are taken from L.W. Kingsland’s translation as it follows the Danish text more literally. This fact is also signalled by Hjørnager Pedersen (2004: 277) who writes about Kingsland that “He likewise generally succeeds in staying close to the original and rendering details correctly.” The ambiguity about movement and fixed position pointed out in the following sentence is not preserved in Hersholt’s translation, and therefore the choice of Kingsland’s translation was the better one for the purposes of this article. 6. The relation between the tin-soldier and the little dancer can be interpreted in other ways. See e.g. Knowles and Malmkjær (1989: 213), who in an analysis of four English “Tin-Soldiers” argue that Andersen’s concern is to set up a contrast between the tin-soldier and the dancer, one as real and genuine and the other fake. 7. The same observations can be made in one Spanish and one German translation of the same sentence. The Spanish translation reads: “La miró sin decir palabra” (Payarols 1959, “He looked at her without saying a word”) and the German “Er sah sie an, aber sie sagten gar nichts” (translator not named, “He looked at her, but they didn’t say anything”). This is not the place to look for the explanations, but the translations might be connected (the Spanish and the English translators have probably used a German text as source text). It could also be the case that the three translators have made a similar decision independently of each other. In this case the explanations might have to do with style, more precisely with the fact that the repetition of the same word, in this case looks, is often considered bad style. See also the following note.

 Cecilia Alvstad 8. In the Spanish translation quoted above, this sentence reads “Miró de nuevo a la muchacha, encontráronse las miradas de los dos, y él sintió que se derretía, pero siguió firme, arma al hombro” (Payarols, 1959, “He looked at the little lady again, their eyes met, and he felt that he melted, but he remained steadfast, his weapon upon his shoulder”). This solution is closer to Andersen’s text than the first occurrence of the formulation quoted above, but still the Danish text makes much clearer that the little lady looks at him by using the pronoun she. The German translation reads: “Er sah das kleine Mädchen an, sie blickte ihn an, und er fühlte, daß er schmelze, aber noch stand er standhaft mit dem Gewehre im Arm” (“He looked at the little girl, she watched him, and he felt that he melted. But still he stood steadfast with the gun on his shoulder”). The German translation is also closer to the Danish text in this formulation of the sentence than in the first one, and the pronoun she is used, but the change of verbs makes the sentence stylistically less marked than in Andersen’s text.

References Andersen, Hans C. 1963 [1838]. “Den standhaftige Tinsoldat”. In Eventyr fortalte for Børn II:1, critical edition by Erik Dal and Erling Nielsen, 121–124. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel Forlag. Andersen, Hans C. 1872. “The Brave Tin Soldier”. Translated by H.B. Paull. Available on-line at http://hjem.get2net.dk/chenero/hca/hcaev011_en.html (retrieved February 14, 2005). Andersen, Hans C. 1959. “The Steadfast Tin-soldier”. In Hans Andersen’s Fairy Tales, translated by L.W. Kingsland, 154–159. London: Oxford University Press. Andersen, Hans C. 1959. “El intrépido soldadito de plomo”. Translated by Francisco Payarol. Available on-line at http://www.hadaluna.com/andersen/a-soldadito.htm (retrieved February 14, 2005). Andersen, Hans C. No date. “Der standhafte Zinnsoldat“. No translator named. Available on-line at http://hjem.get2net.dk/chenero/hca/hcaev011_ de.html (retrieved February 14, 2005). Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is There a Text in This Class. The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hjørnager Pedersen, Viggo. 2004. Ugly Ducklings? Studies in the English Translations of Hans Christian Andersen’s Tales and Stories. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark. Holland, Norman. 1975. 5 Readers Reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. Iser, Wolfgang. 1978. The Act of Reading. A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Translation of Der Akt des Lesens. Theorie ästhetischer Wirkung. Munich: Fink, 1976. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press. Jauss, Hans Robert. 1977. Ästhetische Erfahrung und Literarische Hermeneutik. I Versuche im Feld der äesthetischen Erfahrung. Munich: Fink. Knowles, Murray and Malmkjær, Kirsten. 1989. “Translating Ideology: Language, Power and the World of the Tin Soldier”. ELR Journal: 205–242. Langer, Judith. 1995. Envisioning Literature. Literary understanding and literature instruction. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. May, Rachel. 1994. The Translator in the Text. On Reading Russian Literature in English. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Rosenblatt, Louise M. 1995 [1938]. Literature as exploration. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.

Translational analysis and the dynamics of reading 

Rosenblatt, Louise M. 1978. The Reader, the Text, the Poem. The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1994. Stierle, Karlheinz. 1980. “The Reading of Fictional Texts.” In The Reader in the Text. Essays on Audience and Interpretation, S.R. Suleiman and Crosman, I. (eds), 83–105. Revised translated version of “Was heisst Rezeption bei fiktionalen Texten?” In Poetica 7, 1975: 345–387. Translated by I. Crosman and T. Zachrau. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Venuti, Lawrence. 1996. “Translation and the Pedagogy of Literature” College English, Vol. 58 (3): 327–44.

The effect of translation on humour response The case of dubbed comedy in Italy Delia Chiaro University of Bologna at Forlì, Italy

A small-scale investigation was carried out to explore how Italian audiences perceive Verbally Expressed Humour (VEH) when it is translated for the screen and how far translation might have an impact on individual Humour Responses (HR); i.e. the physiological responses to humorous stimuli in terms of laughter and smiling (McGhee 1979). 22 British informants watched seven video-clips containing examples of VEH in their original language (English) and recorded their hr to each clip. Similarly, 34 Italians recorded their HR to the same clips in their dubbed and/or subtitled Italian versions. A t-test for independent samples on informants’ responses revealed that the Italians’ hr was slightly lower than that of the British respondents thus implying that translational impact on hr was minimal.

Keywords: audience perception; humour response; screen translation; impact of translation; verbally expressed humour

1. Introduction It is a well-known fact that both European cinema and TV are dominated by American fictional products which, outside the UK, are either dubbed or subtitled according to the dominant tradition in each state. Interestingly, European Audiovisual Observatory surveys clearly indicate that, with the exception of France, fiction is the most watched genre in Europe and the category of sitcoms represents over a third of what is classified as fiction.

 Delia Chiaro

Non-US Imports

Germany

Spain

France

UK

Films

Fiction

Films

Fiction

Films

Fiction

Films

Fiction

Films

US and US Coproductions

Fiction

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Italy

Figure 1. Volume of US-originated fiction and films broadcast on television channels in the five principal European markets Source: European Audiovisual Observatory Press Release 28 January 2003

The translation of Verbally Expressed Humour (VEH) appears to be a notoriously complex task which is rendered even more problematic when it occurs in audiovisual texts such as films and sitcoms (Chiaro 1992, 2000a, 2000b; Zabalbeascoa 1996). This supposition is strongly supported by the results of a survey carried out on a sample of 96 screen translators in Italy, who unanimously ranked translating VEH as the hardest problem they had to face in the dubbing process (Benincà 1999). Furthermore, a study of the perception of VEH conducted by the present author revealed that 75% of Italian respondents tested on their appreciation of VEH in translation extracted from nine different programmes simply did not understand the jokes in question (Chiaro 2004). Now, if this situation is widespread, audience feedback on what have presumably been difficult translations can surely help the Screen Translation (ST) industry improve quality standards in all areas and not just those relative to VEH. In other words, if research on audience perception can help shed light on an especially complex area of ST with a view to improving quality, by default, it should also help improve quality in less demanding areas too. Of course, there are a number of reasons why audiences either do not get or else misunderstand instances of VEH. For example, they may not be familiar with a cultural reference upon which a gag hinges. If that is the case, there is little the translator can do to help, especially since the practice of replacing the quip with a more domesticated one in the target language is not always possible. This is the case when, for example, the VEH depends on the visuals on the screen. Furthermore, the very speed and timing of verbal banter often render the inclusion of additional explanatory information almost impossible. However, in cases in which VEH is not dependent on visual elements on screen and is purely verbal or reliant on general encyclopedic knowledge,

The effect of translation on humour response 

the quality of translation may well be at least partly responsible if the audience does not get the joke. Furthermore, if our assumptions are correct and translation is a significant factor, then audiences may well not be getting a square deal from a service such as ST. Whether it is multinationals or private commissioners actually paying operators who produce them, STs are part of a service offered for the consumption of a general, anonymous audience and in such terms can be considered a public service. In other words ST is a service provided to the general public. Since some of the charges for TV license fees, satellite subscriptions, DVDs etc. presumably go towards offsetting the cost of this language mediation, it follows that consumers have the right to a good-quality service. It would appear that translated versions of many comic audiovisual texts are either unknown or unsuccessful outside their culture of origin. Italy is a case in point. Very few Italian big-screen comedies do well abroad and most Italian comedians suffer the same fate. Of course, there are exceptions. Roberto Benigni has become a cult comic figure worldwide, but a film like La Vita è Bella (1999) hardly relies on the use of puns for its success. More likely it depends on factors like Benigni’s physicality and on the use of comedy to come to grips with universal themes. Again, many romantic comedies and TV sitcoms from the US are successful world wide, although their triumph may well have more to do with marketing than with quality (see Chiaro 2000b and 2003). Similarly, research demonstrates that Italian audiences simply misunderstand much of the VEH which occurs in imported films and sitcoms (Antonini et al. 2003; Chiaro 2004). Thus the research questions we are raising in this study are twofold. Could VEH not be getting across because the concept of ‘sense of humour’ is culturespecific? Or could it be because audiences are provided with poor translations? As we know, many imported comedies are indeed successful beyond the boundaries of their country of origin. No one can deny the internationality of Mr Bean (who is notably silent) or Almodóvar’s characters (who, like Benigni, embrace universal themes via comedy) and the same may be said of other cinematic and tv genres. Nevertheless, while some comedies are successful, most others fail. The question remains, then: to what extent does the success of cinematic comedy depend on culture-specific factors? And to what extent does it depend on translation? Although the success of a film (or indeed a sitcom) may well be the result of good marketing, the effect of the quality of dubbing and subtitling cannot be undervalued. We believe that translation may well be a significant factor in the success or failure of a comic film, and indeed comedy for the small screen too. The present study explores the reactions of subjects exposed to VEH which has been translated for cinema and television. Our research hypothesis is that, bearing in mind individual variations in personality traits and mood, if exposed to purely visual humour, members of Culture A (in this case Italians) should have the same reaction as members of Culture B (British viewers). However, if members of Culture A are then exposed to VEH which has been translated into Language A (in this case Italian) from Language B (in this case English) they will display a less positive reaction to the same

 Delia Chiaro

VEH than members of Culture B (native speakers of English in this case from the UK) exposed to the same VEH in Language B (English). In order to test our hypothesis and measure the reaction of subjects exposed to translated VEH, we tested a group of Italians by having them watch a series of examples of both visual humour and VEH originally created in English and subsequently translated into Italian. We then compared their reactions with those of a group of native speakers of English who had watched the same segments in the original.

2. The conceptual framework The present study brings together research from two disciplines, namely, Translation Studies (TS) and Humour Studies (HS).

2.1

Translation Studies

Although TS appears to have dedicated much energy to the issue of translating puns (Redfern 1984; Delabastita 1996, 1997), not enough attention seems to have been paid to their function, which is presumably that of amusing the viewers. Unfortunately, literature on the broader subject of translating humour is scarce and frequently anecdotal; furthermore it has been largely concerned with issues of equivalence and translatability (Laurian & Nilsen 1989) rather than with the needs of translators and end-users. However, more recently, the translation of humour does seem to be making a comeback with a fresh outlook (Vandaele 2003, Chiaro 2005). Studies dealing specifically with ST and VEH are mostly descriptive in nature (Antonopoulu, 2003; Zabalbeascoa 1996), but here too, researchers have recently begun to introduce a new dimension by examining audience perception of translated veh from a sociological viewpoint (Fuentes Luque 2001; Antonini, Bucaria and Senzani 2003, Chiaro 2004).

2.2

Humour Studies

For the purpose of the present study the three areas of HS which are most relevant are psychology, sociology and linguistics. According to psychologists, humour is a universal characteristic and personality research has revealed that, while laughter and smiling are recognized as universal and innate expressions, sense of humour is affected by nature and culture (Ruch 1998). Unfortunately, although we know that all humans are capable of perceiving something as being funny, there is as yet not enough research regarding the culture specificity of laughter. Sociologist Davies (1998) has investigated joke genres across different societies and quantitative techniques have been applied to test sense of humour in a variety of

The effect of translation on humour response 

systematic studies which compare French viewers to German viewers (Ruch et al. 1991) and Germans to Italians (Ruch and Forabosco 1996) by means of measurement scales (Ruch 1991 and 1998). In addition, linguists have shown that the underlying structure of short comedic texts such as jokes, are universal too (Raskin 1985, Attardo 1994). However, all these studies ignore the issue of translated veh, so that very little research has investigated what occurs when different cultures are faced with interlingually translated stimuli. Moreover, if humour is psychologically, socially and linguistically comparable across cultures, then it should follow that when VEH is translated adequately, bearing in mind individual variables such as personality and mood, it should result in generating a positive Humour Response (HR) in its recipients, even though presented in a translated form. The term hr was first coined by psychologist Paul McGhee (1979) to describe the physiological response to humorous stimuli, namely laughter and smiling. However, we have adapted the term in accordance to research carried out more recently in personality research to include the emotional response produced by a humorous stimulus. In other words, it is possible to appreciate something as being funny without necessarily displaying amusement outwardly, but nonetheless we still experience an emotional sensation labelled ‘exhilaration’ (Ruch 1993). What we would like to know is whether the linguistic transposition of VEH has a negative effect on its recipients. In other words, do recipients experience exhilaration to a lesser degree when veh has undergone the process of translation?

3. Research design and methodology 3.1

Preliminary qualitative research

Preliminary qualitative research was carried out in two short phases. Firstly, we identified the British comedies that had been most successful in Italy over the past twenty years according to box office receipts. These were: A Fish Called Wanda (1988, UK, Charles Crichton); Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994, UK, Mike Newell); The Full Monty (1997, UK, Peter Cattaneo); Notting Hill (Roger Mitchell, UK, 1999) and Bridget Jones’ Diary (Sharon Maguire, UK/USA/France, 2001)1. Secondly, we carried out a series of short interviews to identify which screen comedians were considered to be most representative of humour in Britain, in Italy and generally. In order to do this, we interviewed five British informants, (3 females and 2 males, aged between 20 and 76); three speakers of American English (2 males aged 30 and 56 and a 23-year-old female) and a group of ten Italian respondents of mixed ages and both sexes. As far as British humour was concerned, Mr Bean was unanimously considered to be representative of British humour by all three groups of informants (British, American and Italian) while Laurel and Hardy were seen as embodying screen comedy across the board. The British informants were also asked to name a slapstick

 Delia Chiaro

comedian in the UK. After much discussion Michael Crawford, well known for his part in a vintage sitcom Some mothers do ‘ave ‘em was chosen. Similarly, all the Italian respondents agreed that Totò was representative of Italian humour on screen.

3.2

Research tools

3.2.1 The corpus of video-clips We viewed the five British blockbusters and identified all the examples of veh contained in each film. We also chose a US comedy that had been a significant box office success, My Big Fat Greek Wedding (Joel Zwick, 2002, US) and identified two examples of veh. We then examined the Italian versions of the six films and identified the same examples in their translated form. We asked six professional translators to evaluate the translations and they generally agreed that all the segments had been translated more than adequately. Similarly, after viewing Mr Bean – the ultimate disaster movie (Mel Smith, UK, 1998), several episodes of Some mothers do ‘ave ‘em, and a selection of material featuring Laurel and Hardy, we chose one clip to represent each, namely a silent scene for Mr. Bean, a purely slapstick scene featuring Michael Crawford, and a slapstick scene which included some speech as representative of Laurel and Hardy. We also chose a clip from the film Un turco napoletano (Mario Mattioli, 1953, Italy) starring Totò. Each scene chosen was then exported into electronic mpg* format and recorded onto magnetic discs both in their original languages and in their Italian versions, with two exceptions. We decided to present the Laurel and Hardy clip in its dubbed Italian version and to leave the Italian clip in the original. The reason for this was twofold. First, we wanted to test reactions to non-verbal humour, but we also wanted to observe the reaction of our British sample on hearing Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy in Italian. The comedians are well known in Italy for having the voice of famous actor Alberto Sordi who was known for his rendition of the duo in an exaggerated English accent. As for Totò, again, we were interested in seeing the British sample’s reaction to his clowning behaviour, despite the linguistic barrier. 3.2.2 The questionnaire A questionnaire was loosely based on the 3WD Humour test, originally designed to measure personality and sense of humour (Ruch 1983).2 It was prepared both in Italian and in English and was divided into two sections: 1. Section A gathered socio-demographic details (i.e. age, sex, education etc.) and respondents’ attitudes towards comic films. Owing to the fact that personality research has shown that humour is, amongst other things, in the state and traits of the beholder, respondents were asked to self-evaluate: a. their sense of humour and b. their mood at the time of filling in the questionnaire.

The effect of translation on humour response 

2. Section B contained two questions on each video-clip. After watching each clip respondents had to evaluate their HR on a 7-point scale which contained the following choices: Table 1. The scale in English and Italian adapted to measure Humour Response to VEH ENGLISH QUESTIONNAIRE

ITALIAN QUESTIONNAIRE

“it made me split my sides laughing” “it made me laugh a lot” “it made me laugh quite a bit” “it made me laugh a little” “it made me smile” “it made me neither laugh nor smile” “it irritated me”

mi ha fatto ridere a crepapelle mi ha fatto ridere parecchio mi ha fatto ridere abbastanza mi ha fatto ridere un pò mi ha fatto sorridere mi ha fatto né ridere né sorridere mi ha infastidito

Next, respondents were asked to evaluate the clips containing examples of VEH on a 1–10 graphic rating scale3. Respondents were tested on 4 examples of veh, from A Fish Called Wanda and Four Weddings and a Funeral; 3 examples from Bridget Jones’ Diary, 2 examples from My Big Fat Greek Wedding and one example each from The Full Monty and Notting Hill.

ENGLISH QUESTIONNAIRE: Give a mark from 0 to 10 according to how much you appreciate the following verbal gag. 10 is the highest and 0 is the lowest you can give. 0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9__10 4 “… AWFUL WEDDED WIFE …” ITALIAN QUESTIONNAIRE: Per giudicare la seguente battuta dia un voto da 0 a 10, dove 10 rappresenta il massimo della comicità e 0 comicità nulla: 0__1__2__3__4__5__6__7__8__9__10 “… ILLEGITTIMA SPOSA

…”

Figure 2. An example of a 10-point graphic rating scale from our questionnaire

3.2.3. The sampling frame Both the English and Italian questionnaires were administered during the month of August 2004.

 Delia Chiaro

Both samples were self-selected. The British sample was obtained by social networking in the city of Manchester, UK and consisted of 22 respondents. The Italian sample was obtained via randomly approaching respondents on a beach at a popular seaside resort in Calabria in the south of Italy (Scalea, Cosenza). The final Italian sample was made up of 34 holiday makers from all over the country. Thus, the total sample consisted of 56 respondents aged between 17 and 76, with a good balance of males and females from mixed social backgrounds. Admittedly, the sample is not especially robust, but adequate for an exploratory study such as this one. Furthermore, it is worth highlighting that unlike a regular paper questionnaire, the present instrument is linked to a series of video-files that respondents must watch before answering each question. Thus, the test lasts between 30 and 40 minutes and in today’s world it is not easy to find people who are willing to volunteer so much time.

3.3. Measuring and exploring differences in veh In order to measure the HR for the various examples of VEH, an index was created for each film by summing up the scores allotted by each respondent for each example in each film. A general index of VEH was then created by summing up all previous indices, and finally, the mean differences of the general index and that of each film for each sub-sample of respondents were tested using an independent sample t-test5 to test our research hypothesis, whereby members of Culture A exposed to VEH which has been translated into Language A (Italian) from Language B (English) will display a less positive reaction to the same VEH than members of Culture B (UK) exposed to the same VEH in Language B (English).

4. Results 4.1

The General Humour Response

Statistical elaboration of the data revealed that the British respondents found all the clips funnier than the Italian ones did, with the exception of the clip featuring the Italian comedian Totò. At first sight, this result is surprising if we consider that the kind of slapstick and purely schoolboy type humour displayed by Mr Bean and Michael Crawford should be universal. Granted, a more positive hr from the British sample could of course be due to greater familiarity with the two comedians, although Mr Bean (aka Rowan Atkinson) is world-famous and is extremely popular in Italy. Furthermore, the antics of both are similar to those of Italian comedian Totò. Yet, even in the latter case, none of the British respondents found him “unfunny” or “irritating”; they simply found him less funny compared to the Italian respondents. Furthermore, the British respondents seemed to appreciate Laurel and Hardy more than the Italian ones did. Interestingly, the clip of Laurel and Hardy showed the two speaking poor Italian with an exag-

The effect of translation on humour response 

geratedly pseudo-British accent, and even if the English-speaking respondents did not understand what they were saying, they still had a more positive hr than the Italian group. Despite the fact that the duo is not specific to either uk or Italian culture, the British sample judged them more positively than the Italian sample. So, are we to conclude that the British have a better sense of humour than Italians, or did the Italians laugh and smile less simply because they were less familiar with the various comedians? After all, the Italians appreciated their fellow citizen Totò more than the Brits did.

The Humour Response to VEH

4.2

Figure 3 compares the mean of the indices of the HR for segments of VEH for the Italian and the British samples, film by film.

Italian

32

Mean of appreciation of VEH

25.8 24

English

27.7 25.7

20.6

19.8 15.1

16

12.9 12.9 7.7

8

0

5.5

FCW

FWED

FM

6.8

7.1

NH

BJ

GK

Examples of Verbally Expressed Humour (VEH)

Figure 3. The Humour Response of the two samples to examples of VEH. (Abbreviations: FCW = A Fish Called Wanda FWED = Four Weddings and a Funeral FM = The Full Monty NH = Notting Hill BJ = Bridget Jones’ Diary GK = My Big Fat Greek Wedding)

As can be seen, the British respondents tended to appreciate the VEH more than the Italian ones, with the exception of the two examples taken from My Big Fat Greek Wedding – a North American film. Moreover, the results of the general index clearly show that the British sample displays a higher appreciation of VEH. In fact, the error bar

 Delia Chiaro

charts (Figure 4) show that the 95% confidence interval for the mean of the two general indices do not overlap and the results of the t-test show that the two means are significantly different at.0001 (Table 2)6.

95% CI Mean of Humour Response to Film

60

50

40

30 N=

34 Italian

19 English

Language

Figure 4. Error bar chart of the general index of appreciation

Table 2. Independent sample t-test of general index by culture t-test for Equality of Means

Equal var. assumed

Equal var. not assumed

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error Difference 95% CI

-3.873 51 .000 -8.8297 2.2797 -13.4063 -4.2531

-4.122 44.482 .000 -8.8297 2.1421 -13.1455 -4.5139

Lower Upper

The effect of translation on humour response 

Table 3. Independent samples t-test (equal variances not assumed) on appreciation of examples of VEH Film/VEH

Language

Mean

Mean difference Sig. 2- tailed

Full Monty: “Lunchbox” gag

Italian English

5.52 7.68

-2.16

.000 ***

Notting Hill: “T-Shirt” gag

Italian English

6.76 7.11

-.34

.592

A Fish Called Wanda: – “British superior gag”

Italian English

4.90 6.37

-1.47

.012 **

– “US Vulgar gag”

Italian English

5.10 6.53

-1.42

.045 *

– “Vietnam gags”

Italian English

5.74 6.37

-.63

.426

– “Chants”

Italian English

4.85 6.58

-1.73

.024 *

Italian English

6.65 6.79

-.14

.763

4 Weddings and a Funeral – ”Holy Spiggot”

– ”Johnned in matrimony”

Italian English

6.19 6.79

-.6

.290

– “Awful wedded wife”

Italian English

6.38 7.42

-1.04

.048 *

– Mixed up names

Italian English

6.47 6.74

-.27

.645

Italian English

4.97 6.63

-1.66

.009 **

Bridget Jones’ Diary – “Have it oeuf ”

– “Up down, up down..”

Italian English

5.18 6.68

-1.51

.049 *

– “Mind the overspill”

Italian English

4.97 6.53

-1.56

.040 *

My Big Fat Greek Wedding – “Bundt gag”

Italian English

6.46 5.53

.093

.183

Italian English

6.41 7.37

-.96

.083

– “Nick, Nick and Nick”

 Delia Chiaro

Finally, Table 3 shows the results of the independent sample t-test for every example of VEH judged by the respondents. As can be seen, more than 60% of VEH examples judged revealed a significant difference (0.05 or more). Thus, as far as VEH is concerned, our research hypothesis seems to be confirmed. The respondents displayed a more positive HR when VEH was produced in their own language and a more negative HR when it was the product of a translation.

5. Discussion Let us now examine our results more closely. The two groups of respondents displayed varying degrees of disparity in HR.

Extensive disparity

5.1

The disparity in hr between the two groups is largest in the appreciation of the veh in the four clips from A Fish Called Wanda. The chosen examples were neither puns nor culture-specific gags, but ‘good lines’ or sharp and clever remarks that are difficult to define in humorous terms yet presented no particular translational problems. We have decided to label such instances ‘Non-Specific veh’. The four gags consist of one in which Otto (Kevin Kline) puts on a British accent and claims that “You (British) think you are so superior”; a second in which Archie (John Cleese) replies “Yes, but you Americans are so irretrievably vulgar”; a third in which he dons a US accent and teases Otto about America pulling out of Vietnam; and a final example, in which the two tease each other regarding Vietnam by chanting “Oh yes we did”, “Oh no we didn’t,” over and over. Although the utterances were translated straightforwardly, a closer examination shows that it is hardly surprising that they were poorly appreciated by the Italian sample. Apart from the possible lack of sociocultural knowledge, poor appreciation is probably due to the presence of an inevitable voice/accent-flattening effect of dubbing which removes the comical effect of a Brit speaking American English and vice versa.

5.2

Average disparity

5.2.1 Four Weddings and a Funeral The three puns in Four Weddings and a Funeral together with an example of Non-Specific VEH display an average-sized gap in the HR between the two groups. The puns were well translated with a series of Italian puns:

(1) “Holy Spiggot” Spiritoso Santo = literally ‘Witty Spirit’(spirito = spirit);

The effect of translation on humour response 

(2) “Johnned in Matrimony” Unti in matrimonio = literally ‘Oiled in matrimony’ (uniti = ‘joined’) and

(3) “Awful wedded wife” Illeggittima sposa = literally ‘Illegitimate wife”.

The example of Non-Specific VEH consisted in priest Rowan Atkinson mixing up the couples’ names. 5.2.2 The Full Monty Similarly, the famous line from The Full Monty “The lunchbox has landed”, translated with E’ arrivata la terza gamba (literally ‘the third leg has landed’ where ‘third leg’ has a similar innuendo as ‘lunchbox’) also displayed an average-sized difference between the two groups. Like the gag, much of the humour in this instance is undoubtedly created by the visuals on screen. 5.2.3 Bridget Jones’ Diary The veh in Bridget Jones’ Diary scored quite low in both sub-samples with an average disparity between the two groups. The low scores are probably due to the fact that the VEH which strongly relied on the visual code was patently based on a sexual innuendo (“Have it oeuf ” Qualcuno lo vuole duro? Literally ‘Would anyone like it hard?’). Although sexual humour is universal, rather like political and religious humour, it may well make some respondents feel uncomfortable. This could explain the low and fairly similar scores in the two groups.

5.3

Minimal disparity

The disparity in the mean of appreciation of the VEH in the clip from the film Notting Hill is minimal in the two sub-samples. This particular clip relies heavily on the visual code and a predictable gag which was subtitled.7 Playing almost as much on the visual code as the verbal code would render minimum disparity quite predictable.

5.4

Zero disparity

However, the most significant signal emerges from the data concerning the British response to the US film My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Both samples gave more or less the same scores. Why? Respondents were presented with an example of Non-Specific VEH in which the bride’s father introduces numerous members of his family to his daughter’s future inlaws and we learn that they are all called “Nick”. The second example consists of the Greek mother who is presented with a highly risen cake known as a “bundt” in the USA. She does not recognize the object as a cake and loudly asks “A bunt? A boont? A bonk?” Now, the term ‘bundt’ is quite unusual in the UK and possibly the British misunderstood the gag. On the other hand, the Italian translation “Una cassata? Una caz-

 Delia Chiaro

zata8?” allows for better wordplay in Italian, as a cassata is a cake and at the same time, the term cazzata, like “bonk”, verges on the taboo. Yet the cake the Italian sample actually saw on the screen was not recognizably a cassata (a white and green flattish cake decorated with bright glacé fruits) but nothing like a high, well-risen bundt. Thus, the Italians got an adequate verbal translation which was totally divorced from what was happening on the screen while the Brits did not get the joke because it remained in US English. As a result, the two samples converge. However, and perhaps more interestingly, unlike the audience, the film from which the clips were taken was neither British nor Italian. Could it be that reactions reveal some kind of neutrality and absence of cultural identification with the scene and language?

6. Conclusions Now the question is, do these results suggest that humour is culture-specific? That the British have a better sense of humour than the Italians? Translators and translation scholars know better. The examples of VEH were all from blockbuster hits and judged as more than adequately translated. And yet, they were consistently rated lower than the Italian sample, despite the fact that respondents mostly claimed that they were in a good mood, generally saw the bright side of life and liked comic films. The small disparity in the levels appreciation between the two samples is in marked contrast to results of a previous study (Chiaro 2004) in which 75% of a sample of 195 Italians failed to recognize and consequently appreciate nine examples of VEH extracted from US sitcoms in translation. While the examples in the present study were all taken from extremely well known and successful films and those in the previous study were extracted from equally famous TV programmes (e.g. Futurama, The Simpsons etc.), the latter examples were deliberately chosen for their poor translations and mismatch between visual and verbal codes while those in the present study were chosen for the quality of their translations. While viewers in the previous study may have been nonplussed by the odd translations, the small disparity between samples in this study does seem to point to the good quality of the translations, just as the high percentage of non-appreciation in the other study indicates their infelicity (48–49). While the study is fairly small, involving only two language combinations and a single screen genre and thus rather limited, the significance of the findings seems to indicate that the results are not simply a matter of chance. In effect, this has been an attempt to apply new methods to the discipline of Translation Studies in the hope of providing food for thought and demonstrating that translation is indeed a significant factor in the success of a screen product and not simply an invisible process within a larger whole. What we need to investigate further is whether this negative impact is due to the quality of the translations, but quality remains an elusive concept. After all, the encyclopedic knowledge of audiences cannot be changed and neither can their cultural affiliation. But there is certainly room for improvement in the translations of veh. Ad-

The effect of translation on humour response 

equacy is all well and good, but it is far removed from excellence. Its achievements, however limited, might contribute to the formulation of larger projects involving not only other language combinations, but other genres of Screen Translation as well.

Notes 1. Although the film is a joint production (UK/USA/France) we have included it as a ‘British’ film due to the fact that it is based on a book by British writer Helen Fielding, is set in the UK and most of the actors take on the roles of British characters, including leading actress Renee Zellweger, who is American yet recites in impeccable Standard British English. 2. The 3WD Humour test, 3 Witz-Dimensionen, measures humour appreciation according to three categories of joke types, namely incongruity, nonsense and sex. Factor analyses then group and classify respondents in terms of personality according to their responses and reported preferences. 3.

The segment is exactly 10 cm long and numbered in 1-cm intervals.

4. This example of VEH has been taken from Four Weddings and a Funeral. 5.

This test is used to compare the means between two separate samples.

6. 0001 is the level of significance (p value) and it indicates that the probability of obtaining a non-significant difference in HR between the two samples is just 1 in 10.000. 7. After trying on a series of inappropriate T-shirts, Spike finally tries one that reads “You are the most beautiful woman in the world” but when he turns around the back reads “Fancy a F***!” Ti va una scopata? 8. The term cazzata in Italian is used to refer to a foolhardy action or else to something that is simple to do. The word borders on vulgar as etymologically it is a corruption of the taboo word for penis.

References Antonini, Rachele, Chiara Bucaria and Alessandra Senzani. 2003. “It’s a priest thing, you wouldn’t understand: Father Ted goes to Italy”. Special issue Antares Umorul –O Nouă Stiinta VI: 26–30. Antonopoulo, Eleni. 2003. “Parody and perverted logic in humorous film and sitcom scripts: a GTVH based account of humorous devices.” Special issue Antares Umorul –O Nouă Stiinta VI: 21–25. Attardo, Salvatore. 1994. Linguistic Theories of Humor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Benincà, Sandra. 1999. “Il doppiaggio: uno studio quali-quantitativo.” Quaderni del Doppiaggio II, 53–148. Comune di Finale Ligure: Finale Ligure. Chiaro, Delia. 1992. The Language of jokes: Analyzing verbal play. London: Routledge. Chiaro, Delia. 2000a. “The British will use tag questions, won’t they? The case of Four Weddings and a Funeral.” In Tradurre il Cinema, C. Taylor (ed.). Trieste: Università degli Studi di Trieste, 27–39.

 Delia Chiaro Chiaro, Delia. 2000b. “Servizio completo. On the (un)translatability of puns on screen.” In La Traduzione Multimediale. Quale traduzione per quale testo?, R. M. Bollettieri Bosinelli, C. Heiss, M. Soffritti and S. Bernardini (eds). Bologna: CLUEB, 27–42. Chiaro, Delia. 2003. “The Implications of the Quality of Verbally Expressed Humour and the success of screen comedy.” Special Issue Antares Umorul –O Nouă Stiinta VI: 14–20. Chiaro, Delia. 2004. “Investigating the perception of translated Verbally Expressed Humour on Italian TV”. ESP Across Cultures, 1, 35–52. Chiaro, Delia (ed.) 2005. “Humor and Translation”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, Special Issue. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Davies, Christie. 1998. Jokes and their Relation to Society. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Delabastita, Dirk (ed.) 1996. Wordplay and Translation. Special Issue The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication 2 (2). Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Delabastita, Dirk (ed.). 1997. Traductio. Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester: St.Jerome Publishing. Fuentes Luque, Adrián. 2001. “Estudio empirico sobre la recepción de humor audiovisual”. In Tradución subordinata (II). El subtitulado, L. García & A. M. Pereira Rodriguez (eds), 85–110. Vigo: Servicio de Publicacións de la Universidad de Vigo. Laurian, Ann Marie and Nilsen, Don (eds). 1989. Humour et Traduction. Humor and Translation, Special issue of Meta 34 (1). McGhee, Paul. 1979. Humor: Its Origin and Development. San Francisco- Reading: Freeman. Raskin, Victor. 1985. Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel. Redfern, Walter. 1984. Puns. Oxford: Blackwell. Ruch, Willibald, Janine Accoce, Christiana Ott and Françoise Bariaud. 1991. “Cross-national Comparisons of Humor Categories: France and Germany.” Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 4: 391–414. Ruch, Willibald. 1993. “Exhilaration”. In The Handbook of Emotion, M. Lewis and J. M. Havilland (eds), 605–616. New York: Guildford Publications. Ruch, Willibald and Forabosco, Giovanantonio. 1996. “Cross-Cultural Study of Humor Appreciation: Italy and Germany”. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 1: 5–22. Ruch, Willibald. 1998. “Foreword and overview. Sense of Humor: a new look at an old concept”. In The Sense of Humor: Explorations of a Personality Characteristic, W. Ruch (ed.), 3–14. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Vandaele, Jeroen (ed.). 2002. Translating Humour. Special Issue of The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Zabalbeascoa, Patrick. 1996. “Translating jokes for dubbed television situation comedies”. In Special Issue of The Translator: Studies in Intercultural Communication, D. Delabastita (ed.). Manchester: St. Jerome.

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits, and the Third Amendment What Italians make of cultural references in dubbed texts Rachele Antonini University of Bologna at Forlì, Italy

On average, Italian television viewers are exposed to more than 350 hours of dubbed programmes per week that are aired on national terrestrial TV channels and which contain a wide array of references to all the specific aspects and features of the source languages and cultures. Do they perceive the countless ‘culture bumps’ (Leppihalme 1997) contained in translated audiovisual products? What do they make of such references? In order to provide an answer to these questions, we carried out a large-scale study which by means of an e-questionnaire linked to 170 excerpts collected from 300 hours of recorded fictional dubbed material set out to investigate Italian audiences’ perception of dubbing.

Keywords: dubbing, dubbese, culture-specific references, questionnaire

1. Introduction It is quite common in Italy to watch a TV episode of The Practice or JAG (but the same situation applies to all genres of imported fictional products) and hear the characters (e.g. a member of a street gang, his/her lawyer and the judge) use the same sociolect, the same register, and the same vocabulary. This happens because they are speaking dubbese (in Italian ‘doppiaggese’), the language variety that Italian audiences have grown accustomed to hearing on the big and small screens. The term dubbese was coined by Italian screen operators to negatively connote the linguistic hybrid that, since the inception of sound in cinema, has emerged as the “standard” variety of Italian spoken by characters in dubbed audiovisual products.

 Rachele Antonini

Over the past 15 years, academics, researchers and operators in screen translation have focused their attention on the study of various aspects of dubbese, such as, for instance, the constraints imposed by lip synchronisation, the rendering of regiolects and sociolects, the transposition of forms and terms of address, contrastive analyses of a film in the original language and its dubbed version(s), and audience perception of dubbed and/or subtitled programmes. Seventy per cent of all foreign fictional products (series, serials, cartoons, etc.) broadcast by European public and private TV networks are US productions or co-productions (2003, http://www.obs.coe.int/about/oea/pr/a02vol5.html), while productions from Latin America, other European countries, Japan and other English-speaking countries make up the remaining 20%. Italy is no exception, thus, Italian TV viewers are constantly exposed and are increasingly becoming accustomed to a huge amount of culture-specific references connoting different aspects of everyday life such as education, politics, history, art, institutions, legal systems, units of measurement, place names, foods and drinks, sports and national pastimes, as experienced in different countries and nations of the world. In order to shed some light on Italian audiences’ perception and interpretation of dubbed culture-specific references, this paper will illustrate and discuss the data and the findings of a large-scale research project aimed at assessing Italian audiences’ perception of dubbed fictional TV programmes and based on the data gathered by means of an equestionnaire and the Forlì Corpus of Screen Translation (FORLIXT).

2. Screen translation in Italy: the market and academia Dubbing and subtitling are a fundamental and strategic area in the development, promotion and distribution of European audiovisual fictional and nonfictional productions. Yet academic and marketing research in the field of viewers’ perception of screen translation (the end users of this service), regrettably and appallingly, has not gone hand in hand with the development of the sector. The figures provided by the European Audiovisual Observatory (http://www.obs. coe.int/about/oea/pr/a02vol5.html) (Figure 1) on the total hours of imported fiction and films imported and broadcast on television channels in Western Europe, show that hundreds of millions of European television end users in a great number of different linguistic regions are exposed to huge amounts of mediated audiovisual products.

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

Figure 1. Volume of imported fiction in Western Europe

Thus, “linguistic transfer occupies a central place in the development of the audiovisual sector in Europe where cultural and linguistic diversity go together” (Andersen 1995: 4), especially in Italy, which being a country with over 600 TV broadcasters rappresenta il laboratorio ideale per analizzare il modo in cui il processo di trasposizione linguistica effettua quell’operazione di mediazione culturale necessaria alla comprensione e quindi alla circolazione delle opere audiovisive provenienti dai più diversi paesi.1 (D’Aversa 1996: 5)

In Italy, programmes that undergo the process of dubbing are mainly films and TV series, and, as evidenced in Figure 1, most of them (up to 70% of the total amount of foreign fictional programmes) are translated from American English. On average and in any given week of the year 2004 and the past few years, the weekly broadcasting of dubbed imported programmes on Italy’s main TV channels exceeds 350 hours2. In view of these data and considering the potential and the volume of business created by the market of audiovisual translation in Italy, we started asking ourselves a few simple questions: why has the impact and perception of multimedia translation been so overtly ignored? Why are distributors and TV channels not interested in what Italian TV viewers make of dubbed programmes available to them on different media? What do Italian viewers make of the range of dubbed programmes available to them

 Rachele Antonini

on different media? If even non-American native speakers of English are often puzzled by cultural references present in the great mass of programmes imported from the US, what are other Europeans to make of them and of their translations for the big and the small screen? While several scholars through numerous comparative and contrastive studies (see for instance the studies included in Bollettieri and Gavioli 1994; Bollettieri and Heiss 1996; Bollettieri et al 2000; Gambier 1998; Gambier and Gottlieb 2001; Lorenzo García and Pereira Rodríguez 2001), have uncovered and examined many of the subtleties and the various compromises involved in the process of translating an audiovisual text in many language combinations, little attention has been paid to what the recipients of this service make of the fictional and nonfictional products they see and hear. Generally speaking, the existing, albeit scant, literature on the perception of screen translation consists of very few theoretical and practical studies “de corte descriptivo o prescriptivo, con limitada fundamentación o aplicación fuera del ámbito de estudio en cuestión” (Fuentes Luque 2001: 69)3. Therefore, the study of the perception of both dubbed and subtitled audiovisual texts in other European countries is still a largely neglected and unexplored field of research. Indeed, apart from the work carried out by the research group on the perception of audiovisual translation at the Advanced School of Modern Languages for Interpreters and Translators (sslmit) of the University of Bologna (e.g. Benincà, 1999; Antonini and Chiaro 2004; Antonini and Chiaro forthcoming) and the many unpublished degree theses written by sslmit undergraduate students there are few exceptions to this state of affairs, namely a handful of studies on the reception of screen translations in Greece (Karamitroglou, 2000), on the perception of dubbed and subtitled humour in Spain (Fuentes Luque, 2001) and on the perception of subtitled humour in Italy (Antonini et al 2003; Chiaro 2004; Antonini 2005).

3. Methodological design and material In order to investigate Italian audiences’ perception of dubbed programmes, we resorted to the means provided by web technology, the social sciences, and the Forlì Corpus of Screen Translation (FORLIXT), a corpus made up of 300 hours of fiction from 30 different TV programmes dubbed into Italian from a number of languages, recorded over a period of eight weeks (February-April 2002). The thirty programmes selected for recording constitute a representative sample of the choice of dubbed produce that Italian viewers had at their disposal, during that specific study period on the seven main terrestrial TV channels (three state-owned channels: Raiuno, Raidue and Raitre, and four privately owned channels: Canale5, Italia1, Rete4, and LA7). These programmes were selected according to the following criteria:

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

– They included all TV genres that undergo the process of dubbing and are aired on Italian terrestrial TV (series, serials, sit-coms, soap-operas, telenovelas and cartoons). – They targeted all kinds of audiences and age-groups. – They were dubbed from a number of languages comprising different varieties of English (US, UK, Canadian and Australian English), German, Brazilian Portuguese, and various Latin American varieties of Spanish (e.g. Chilean and Peruvian Spanish). After viewing the study material, we selected an initial pool of 1,000 instances of dubbese which we submitted to focus groups and further reduced to a maximum of 170 short clips. Each contained one of the following features resulting in an instance of unnaturally occurring Italian which we could use to test audience perception of instances of ‘drops in translational voltage’4: – culture-specific references; – lingua-cultural references; – language-specific features. We also created a fourth category comprising ten instances of not-strictly verbal culturespecific references, i.e. all those visual elements that are based more on what is seen rather than said on the screen. These elements are fundamental for the full understanding of the situation or the plot, and are not part of the Italian culture (e.g. a funeral in a pet cemetery, food laid out on a Thanksgiving dinner table, etc.). Each of the three main categories specified above was then divided into a number of thematic subgroups containing ten clips each, as exemplified in Figure 2. This division of the video files first into categories and then into thematic groups was called for by the practical need to give some order to the large number of clips and the design of the questionnaire. We then designed and piloted a questionnaire which was subsequently converted into electronic format5. This e-questionnaire consisted of six blocks. Each one of the first four blocks corresponded to one of the four categories and thus contained a clip selected at random from each of them. Each clip was introduced by a short synopsis of the episode from which it was extracted and was followed by a short description of the programme. After viewing each clip the respondents were asked to rate their appreciation of the clip on a graphic rating scale from 0 to 10 aimed at assessing self-reported understanding of the content, and to briefly explain what they had understood. The last two blocks contained, respectively, general questions on dubbing and subtitling, and classification questions.

 Rachele Antonini Culture-specific references

VIP’s

Education Food and drink

Language-specific references

Place names

Institutions

VEH Gestures Idioms

Money and measures

Allusions Songs, rhymes, poems

National sports and holidays

Allocution

Books, films, TV programmes

Conventional calques

Regional and social varieties

Lingua-cultural drops in translational voltage

Figure 2. The three main categories

The e-questionnaire was launched and publicised by means of a pop-under that appeared from February to May 2004 on one of the most important and popular Italian web domains: www.virgilio.it6. The pop-under was programmed to appear on Virgilio’s Homepage and other thematic pages, namely, Culture and Books, Music, News, Cinema and TV (in order to reach people of different age groups and sociodemographic backgrounds)7. When Virgilio’s visitors clicked on the pop-under they were directed onto the website created on our University server, where they filled in the questionnaire. All their responses were then sent and uploaded directly onto a database especially created on our Department server.

4. The sample profile Our sample was randomly drawn from a specific population: the 12,000,000 web users who on average and on a monthly basis access virgilio.it’s Homepage and thematic pages. As shown in Figure 3, 40% of the 253 respondents are female, 60% male; their age ranges mainly between 18 and 40; 60% have a secondary school diploma; and their job belongs mostly to the white-collar and professional workers category, but there are also many students.

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

Figure 3. Sample profile

Moreover, the analysis of the responses given to the questions included in the fifth block of the questionnaire allowed us to assess a number of features. First of all, they watch between 1 to 5 hours of TV every day, with a strong preference for serials and series (37%) and films (32%). They showed a moderate preference for sitcoms (16%) and cartoons (12%); and only a small part of the sample watch soap operas (3%) and telenovelas (0.3%). Secondly, 93% declared they had studied English (50% during secondary education, 16% on their own and 12% at university), and 45% that they had studied other languages such as German (49%), Spanish (47%), and Portuguese (4%); 69% stated that they had visited an English-speaking country (55% Great Britain, 26% US, 14% Ireland), mostly on vacation (56%). Thirdly, 96% of the respondents reported that they were able to identify the source country and thus the original language of the dubbed programmes they watched and, when asked to rate the quality of dubbing available on Italian television, they replied that they believed that the quality of dubbing in Italy is fairly good (63%). And finally, when asked what form of multimedia translation they would choose if given the choice, 40% of respondents stated a preference for a choice of both dubbed and subtitled programmes while 25% preferred dubbing.

 Rachele Antonini

5. Measuring the perception of culture-specific references For the purposes of this paper I would like to outline and present descriptive data concerning how Italian TV viewers perceive the dubbing of culture references as they are dealt with by Italian screen translators and operators. The culture-specific category contained sixty clips divided into six sub-groups which included examples of references to the US education system (e.g. high school, yearbook, college, marks, etc.), food and measurements (e.g. place names, Mississippi mud pie, currency, sizes, etc.), sport (e.g. scores in football, cheerleaders, players, basketball team, etc.), institutions (e.g. 911 – the American emergency number, articles of the Constitution, amendments, the electoral system, etc.), famous people and events (VIPs, programmes, historical events, etc.), the legal system (death row/sentence, jury, US/Australian courtrooms, etc.). All these examples were chosen on the basis of the programmes available on Italian terrestrial TV during the two-month recording period mentioned above. This block of the questionnaire contained two questions aimed at assessing the perception of culture-specific references: the first asked the respondents to watch and then rate their understanding of the clip (selected for them at random from a pool of sixty clips); while the second asked them to explain in their own words the content of the clip. The scores obtained by aggregating the ratings assigned to the self-reported level of understanding of all the clips contained in the culture-specific category, allowed us to conclude that seventy per cent of the respondents declared that they had understood the examples contained in the video files to which they had been exposed. However, when we analysed their explanations of the clips and compared them to the answers given to the previous question, it was clear, as illustrated by the second pie chart in Figure 4, that 80% of all the culture-specific references taken into consideration by the study were definitely obscure for Italian TV viewers.

Figure 4. Declared vs actual understanding of culture-specific references

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

This discrepancy became even more evident when we analyzed the respondents’ declared and actual understanding of all the specific subgroups of culture-specific references that we took into consideration. A more detailed analysis of audiences’ perception of all the subgroups included in this category, as illustrated in Figure 5, indicates that although Italian TV audiences believe and declare that they have understood most of these references, in reality they have not.

Figure 5. Declared vs actual understanding of all culture-specific subgroups

All the references taken into consideration are based on information that requires no specific knowledge on the part of the source audiences because, for instance, they either refer to national foods or directly evoke a topical or historical event or place. With very few exceptions, the main strategy employed to render these references was to translate them mot à mot with very few attempts to adapt them to the target language. Moreover, in some instances a misunderstanding on the part of the screen translator resulted in a translation that not only did not render the reference contained in the original, but actually transformed it into a wrong piece of information. Generally speaking, the respondents recognized the fact that there was a reference to something they did not understand, but most of the time were not able to explain it even though they knew that it was relevant in order to fully understand the content of the clip. The initial analysis of the data led to the categorization of the responses given to the first four blocks of the questionnaire into four main groups according to the respondents’ declared understanding (based on the scores obtained by means of the

 Rachele Antonini

graphic rating scale) versus their actual levels of understanding of the clips (based on their explanations). By comparing the individual means of the ratings allotted to the clips contained in the six subcategories (as shown in Table 1) it emerged that the respondents thought they had understood most of the culture-specific references. Table 1. Means of the ratings allotted to declared understanding. Institutions

Education

Food & Measurements

Famous

Sport

Legal

8.06

7.68

7.50

6.73

6.49

3.30

However, a detailed analysis of the results obtained by categorizing the respondents’ explanations of the clips with a YES or NO value, gives a different perspective of their actual understanding.

5.1

High rate of understanding

The subcategories that recorded the (relatively) highest levels of actual understanding as compared to their declared understanding of the clips were the Legal and Education groups. 5.1.1 The perception of references to the legal system The Legal group consisted of ten clips which referred to various aspects of the legal and juridical system and dealings such as the death row and how trials (e.g. the jury, the oath, etc.) are carried out in the US or Australia. Television series that deal with stories and plots based on the lives of lawyers are quite successful in Italy and are usually aired in prime time slots; thus we expected high levels of understanding. What was unexpected was to record such a discrepancy between the declared and the actual understanding: while only 24% of the 33 people who viewed a clip contained in this subcategory declared that they had understood it (with a mean of 3.30), in reality 36% had actually done so. Moreover, the comments that supported this actual understanding provided a detailed and exhaustive description of the procedures and situations depicted in the excerpts. Cross tabulations with age and gender revealed that the respondent more likely to display the highest level of actual understanding is a male in the 18–25 age cohort. 5.1.2 The perception of references to the educational system The Education subcategory contained ten video files which showed references to the US school and education system. Following the huge success on the small screen8 of series such as Happy Days, Beverly Hills, and many other US-imported series of this kind, we expected our respondents (especially those in the 18–40 age group) to be familiar with different aspects of high school and college life. However, the analysis of

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

the explanations the respondents wrote to describe the content of the clips revealed that they were acquainted with only a few of those references we chose to submit to their attention. The clips containing references to high school (the class ring, grades, the yearbook, SATs and pre-registration to college) and college/university (grades, student advisors and student loans) that do not normally compare with the Italian educational system, but are often present in US-imported series and films, were taken from highly successful series such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Simpsons, Roswell and Felicity. Even though the fifty respondents who viewed the clips included in the Education sub-category declared that they had understood all of the clips (with a mean of 7.68), in reality only 34% of them had understood seven out of these ten references, while no understanding whatsoever was recorded for the clips that dealt with more specific references to: i) marks at college, ii) the class ring and iii) the resident advisor. Cross tabulations with the different age cohorts showed that the understanding of the clips/ references varies according to age and sex; higher levels of understanding were recorded by the 25-to-30 age cohort, while not all the male and female respondents had understood the same references.

5.2

Medium-high rate of understanding

The Institutions subcategory contained a number of references that recorded a moderate level of understanding. The video clips that were submitted to our sample were excerpts from The Third Watch, Jarod the Pretender, Futurama, JAG and The Simpsons. They included references to 911, Article 92 of the American Constitution plus various amendments, the State Department, the voter registration system, etc. In this case, while 83% of the 47 respondents who viewed the 10 clips contained in this section (with a mean value of 8.06) thought they had understood the references, in fact only 21% had done so successfully. The respondents’ descriptions of the clips showed that the references that were more easily recognizable were those related to the US electoral system (e.g. the fact that you need to register in order to have the right to vote in a political election), the State Department (i.e. its functions and its Italian counterpart), the 911 and Article 92 of the American Constitution. No understanding at all was recorded for any clip related to hospitals (i.e. the fact that health care in the US is extremely costly), amendments to the US Constitution (e.g. the Third Amendment) and immigration laws.

5.3

Medium-low rate of understanding

The Food and Measurements (F&M) and Sport subcategories, though still in the midrange, recorded lower percentages of moderate understanding. Even though their respective means of declared understanding (7.50 and 6.49) were quite high, the per-

 Rachele Antonini

centages related to the actual understanding of the references they contained were only 13% and 10%. 5.3.1 The perception of references to food, measurements and place names In the Food and Measurements (F&M) section respondents were asked to view and subsequently rate and explain instances of dubbese (let us not forget that the term ‘dubbese’ refers to all translational conventions which are unlike everyday occurrences of Natural Italian but common in dubbed products) related to a pool of 10 clips which contained references to a variety of cultural aspects such as food (e.g. the Mississippi mudpie, BLT and fudge), place names (for instance, references to places in various countries and cities such as Peru, streets and places in New York, South Dakota, etc.), currencies (e.g. a nickel or soles), clothing sizes (e.g. size sixteen). All these references, except for the BLT sandwich (which was localised and translated with ‘bruschetta’, ‘lattuga’ e ‘Tabasco’), were subject to a word-for-word translation. 5.3.2 The perception of references to sport The Sport subcategory included various references to American football and basketball. Most of the information conveyed by the source texts referred to different aspects of this sport; e.g. what kind of goals you need to reach 33 points at the Super Bowl, players’ roles, strategies, and cheerleading. The excerpts included in this group were recorded mainly from American series such as Dawson’s Creek and The Third Watch. When asked to explain the clips, and thus the references they contained, the respondents affirmed a very high understanding of most of them (71%), as well as assigning a high self-reported rating (a mean of 6.49) to their level of comprehension. Nonetheless, the comparison of the data showed that, once again, in reality they had not understood what was happening on the screen. As a matter of fact, 90% of the sample did not recognize the references contained in the clips.

5.4

Minimal Understanding

The Famous subcategory is the one that recorded the lowest levels of actual understanding (5%). The excerpts were recorded from a pool of series, sitcoms and cartoons that included The Family Guy, Sex and the City, JAG, Felicity, Will the Fresh Prince of Bel Air, etc. The clips included in this section contained references to literary works, famous writers (e.g. Ken Follett and Stephen King) and performers (for instance, Diana Ross, Jenny Lake, etc.), columnists (e.g. Martha Stewart), film characters, singers, events and so on. In other words, the references clearly belonged to the encyclopedic knowledge of most US television viewers, but were unlikely to be recognized by Italian audiences. Nonetheless, once more, 66% of the 44 respondents who viewed one of the clips included in this subcategory rated their understanding of the clips with a high score (6.73).

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

Only two respondents recognized two out of ten references, namely a reference to Willy Wonka and a reference to the Vietnam war; any reference to other culture-specific items contained in the clips specified above was lost on the respondents.

6. Conclusions The descriptive analysis of the data illustrated above has clearly shown that there is a remarkable discrepancy between what the viewers declared they had understood and what they actually did understand. Generally speaking, they comprehended only a small percentage of the clips and, in some cases, their actual understanding was close to zero. Moreover, the low percentage of correct responses, though slightly influenced by certain variables, such as age and, in some cases, gender, was not due to the level of the respondents’ knowledge of and familiarity with English or other languages and cultures. Thus, the respondents’ answers lead to the conclusion that very often culture-specific references are totally misunderstood. Dubbing is a public service provided to millions of users and dubbese is the language all Italian viewers are exposed to when they watch an imported fictional product; thus the majority of Italian audiences can only rely on the dubbed text in order to (mis)understand what is happening on the screen. Therefore, we can safely state that the quality of screen translation is fundamental both for these users’ appreciation of the film, series or cartoon they choose to watch and, possibly, for the success of these products. According to Luyken (1991 :154) “the scope for maneuver [for a screen translator] is far more limited than for literary translation” and therefore the quality of the translation cannot be blamed for these shortcomings. However, the rapid developments in the multimedia sector, like for instance the new interactive digital television, can provide the viewers with exactly the kind of added explanatory information that may help them understand and better appreciate what is happening on the screen.

Notes 1. “represents the ideal place to analyse how the language transfer process performs the cultural mediation necessary to comprehend and distribute those audiovisual works that come from the most varied countries”, my translation. 2. These figures are rough calculations based on information from weekly Film TV and refer to the three state-owned RAI channels (RAI1, RAI2 and RAI3), the three privately-owned Mediaset channels (Rete 4, Canale 5 and Italia Uno), and LA7. If we take into consideration MTV and the over 600 regional and local TV channels then it is impossible to provide even an approximate figure of the total hours of dubbed programmes broadcast on Italian terrestrial television. 3. “that are either of a descriptive or prescriptive kind, with limited scope or application outside their specific field of study”, my translation.

 Rachele Antonini 4. This definition is an attempt at describing what viewers usually experience when the intended message does not get across. When we watch a translated audiovisual product we often hear something which does not sound quite right and which may cause us to experience a ‘drop in translational voltage’. 5.

The questionnaire remained accessible until May 2004.

6. Virgilio.it is part of the European Fast Web and has a population of 12,000,000 monthly visitors. 7. The sample is certainly biased with regard to the Italian TV viewers population. However, it is representative of the Italian Internet population. 8. On the big screen films about college and university life in the US have always been boxoffice hits in Italy.

References Andersen, Lone. 1995. “A topical issue”. Sequentia, 2 (4), 4. Antonini, Rachele. 2005. “The perception of subtitled humour in Italy”. Humor – International Journal of Humor Research, 18(2): 209–225. Antonini, Rachele, Bucaria, Chiara and Senzani, Alessandra. 2003. “It’s a priest thing, you wouldn’t understand: Father Ted goes to Italy”. Special issue Antares Umorul –O Nouă stiinta VI: 26–30. Antonini, Rachele and Chiaro, Delia. 2004. “The Quality of Dubbed Television Programmes in Italy: the experimental design of an empirical study”. In Cross-Cultural Encounters: New Languages, New Sciences, New Literatures, S. Albertazzi, M. Bondi, G. Buonanno, N. Maxwell, C. Pelliconi and M. Silver (eds), 33–44. Roma: Officina Edizioni. Antonini, Rachele and Chiaro, Delia. Forthcoming. “The General Perception of Likelihood of Occurrence: The translational norms of language-specific features on the Italian screen”. In a synopsis of two papers given at the London conference In so many words. Language transfer on the screen. 6–7.2.2004, J. Diaz-Cintas and G. Anderson (eds). London: Macmillan Palgrove. Benincà, Sandra. 1999. “Il doppiaggio: uno studio quali-quantitativo”. Quaderni del Doppiaggio II. Comune di Finale Ligure: Finale Ligure. Bollettieri Bosinelli, Rosa M. and Gavioli, Laura (eds). 1994. Il doppiaggio. Trasposizioni linguistiche e culturali. Bologna: CLUEB. Bollettieri Bosinelli, Rosa M. and Heiss, Christine (eds). 1996. Traduzione Multimediale per il Cinema, la Televisione e la Scena. Bologna: CLUEB. Bollettieri Bosinelli, Rosa M., Heiss, Christine, Soffritti, Marcello and Bernardini, Silvia (eds). 2000. La Traduzione Multimediale. Quale Traduzione per Quale Testo? Bologna: CLUEB. Bucaria, Chiara. 2001. La percezione del testo filmico doppiato in TV: uno studio empirico. SSLiMIT, Advanced School in Modern Languages for Interpreters and Translators, University of Bologna at Forlì (unpublished dissertation). Chiaro, Delia. 2004. “Investigating the perception of translated Verbally Expressed Humour on Italian TV”. ESP Across Cultures 1: 35–52. D’Aversa, Paolo. 1996. “Introduzione”. In Barriere linguistiche e circolazione delle opere audiovisive: La questione doppiaggio, Atti del Convegno “Un ascensore per la torre di Babele, 9–10 febbraio 1996”, E. Di Fortunato and M. Paolinelli (eds). Roma: AIDAC.

SAT, BLT, Spirit Biscuits and the Third Amendment 

Eurobarometer Report 54. 2001. Europeans and Languages. Bruxelles: European Commission, Education and Culture Directorate-General. Fuentes Luque, Adrián. 2001. “Estudio empírico sobre la recepción del humor audiovisual”. In Traducción subordinada (II). El subtitulado, L. Lorenzo García and A. M. Pereira Rodríguez (eds), 85–110. Vigo: Universidad de Vigo. Gambier, Yves. 1998. Translating for the Media. Papers from the international conference “Languages and the Media” Berlin, November 22–23, 1996. University of Turku: Centre for Translating and Interpreting. Gambier, Yves and Gottlieb, Henrik. 2001. (Multi)Media Translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Karamitroglou, Fotios. 2000. Towards a Methodology for the Investigation of Norms in Audiovisual Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Leppihalme, Ritva. 1997. Culture Bumps. Cleveland: Multilingual Matters. Luyken, Georg-Michael. 1991. Overcoming Language Barriers in Television. Dubbing and Subtitling for the European Audience. Manchester: The European Institute for the Media.

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles Marta Mateo University of Oviedo, Spain

Opera surtitles have not received much attention within Translation Studies – not even within the field of multimedia translation, in which they belong – and it is the purpose of this paper to deepen our understanding of this translation type. The communicative context closely determines textual strategies for surtitles, which are constrained by technical, format and timing factors. And the function of surtitles – helping comprehension without too much interference with the overall reception of the opera sung in the original language – also affects their textual form. This paper will compare the translation strategies adopted by some opera houses from various countries, in order to show how different ways of implementing operational norms and of negotiating the constraints imposed by the transmission channel and by reception factors produce different surtitles in the same language. The analysis will force us to challenge some traditional concepts used in the study of translation.

Keywords: opera surtitles, constraints, translation norms, macrostructure strategies, reception

1. Text, context, reception Opera has traditionally enjoyed two very different types of translation: sung translations, which are still the way chosen by certain companies to convey foreign operas, and prose versions, which we are nowadays most familiar with through the literal translations coming with recordings. Surtitles have recently joined these two ways of translating opera texts and they have been so enthusiastically welcomed by audiences all over the world that they are in fact seen as a threat to the survival of sung translations by those opera companies which perform in the language of the audience. 1

 Marta Mateo

Surtitles consist of a condensed written translation of the libretto, which is projected on a rectangular screen above the stage – or on small screens on the backs of the seats of the auditorium – at the same time as the source text is being sung, so that the audience receives both the sung performance and the written translation simultaneously. The process does not present the same verbal problems as a sung translation, in which textual choices are constrained by the need to make the target text fit the notes and tempo of the original score (see Apter 1985; Glick 1987; and Mateo 1994); and it is also quite different from the literal translating done for CDs or bilingual published libretti, even though these are often used as the point of departure for surtitles. The difficulties and strategies in surtitling are mostly determined by the need for synchronisation with the performance on stage and for condensing the text due to the requirements of the projecting screen and the audience’s reading speed. Although surtitles have many points in common with subtitles, having in fact derived from them, they also show their own peculiarities which set the two processes slightly apart. Adapting Assis Rosa’s description of the process of subtitling (2001: 213–214), surtitling may also be described as “multi-channel and multi-code”, implying: “a change of medium” – from the singing and gestures of the opera performance to the written text on the screen; “a change of channel” – from oral/aural to visual; “a change of the form of signals” – from phonic/musical substance to graphic substance; and “a change of code” – from sung (and sometimes spoken) verbal language, together with non-verbal language, to written verbal language. Two systems of auditory and temporal signs (verbal language and music) are inseparably linked to the images audiences can see on the stage, and they must be translated into the written medium of the screen in such a way that, as in subtitling (Díaz Cintas 2003: 194), a target text is produced which also matches those images. But if subtitles are constrained by the physical characteristics of the TV/cinema screen and by the visual synchronisation, opera surtitles are also submitted to the time restrictions of the music. Indeed, the specificity of surtitling partly relates to the nature of the textual genre for which it was first conceived: opera, an art form with a multiplicity of signifying systems and communication channels (Rubiera 1993: 78), presenting an aural dimension (both vocal and instrumental) and a visual one (lighting, staging, proxemic and kinesic signs, costumes and make-up of the performance). The peculiar collaboration between voice, words, music and gestures in opera has two important implications for its translation in no matter what form the latter takes: first, the libretto is not an autonomous entity since – although its silent reading is possible – it is not until it materialises in the singing that we have a real operatic experience (Rubiera 1993: 75–76); secondly, the omnipresence of music becomes a determining factor in translation choices, marking the division of the libretto into the different captions to be projected as well as their synchronisation and time of exposure. The fact that the verbal text is actually sung is also the reason for the textual peculiarities of opera libretti, which contain “rhymes and other phonic features suited to a musical setting” (Low 2002:

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

102), inevitably affecting the general characteristics of target texts produced through this type of translation. The specificity of surtitling is also marked by the context in which it takes place: opera is a live experience and opera surtitles are prepared at the same time as the production is and, unlike subtitles, are projected live at the performance. This gives surtitles a sense of immediacy and the vulnerability of a live transmission – “where much is happening… and where much could go wrong” (Low 2002: 102). The context must also be understood in a technical sense, as the screen on which surtitles are projected imposes its own restrictions, normally limiting them to a maximum of two lines per title with around 35 characters per line. The type of screen and the system used to produce the surtitles also affect the final form these take: the original system – slides – only accepted a limited number of titles per act, constraining the target text even further, and allowed no changes once the slides were edited. These problems have been solved by the more modern computerised systems, in which titles are produced electronically and projected via a digital video projector, there being no limit to their number. Re-editing was still a problem in some of the earlier computer systems, but PowerPoint has now solved this too.2 A wider sense of context must also be incorporated into the study of opera surtitling so that we may consider all the different stages involved in the process which may affect the final product: an operatic experience is the result of multiple agents – composer, librettist, conductor, stage manager, singers, chorus, orchestra, lighting and sound technicians, etc. – all collaborating in their different roles and establishing certain power relations which the process of surtitling does not escape. So although the target receptor of the titles is the audience, “the ‘client’ of the translator is, in practical terms, the director of the production, […] whose comments cannot be ignored” (Low 2002: 103). Text, context and reception all determine the process and products of surtitling. Kelley Rourke (from Glimmerglass Opera, in New York) nicely sums this up with her description of the role of supertitles:3 “There are three basic masters that Supertitles serve – the libretto as it was written; the production as it is seen; and the audience and their experience in the theatre.”4 This will have to be borne in mind when studying translation policies, norms and strategies, which will be the object of this paper.

2. Translation norms and strategies for surtitling In the present study, I will focus on the actual work done by several surtitling companies, illustrating translation norms and comparing different strategies used for one and the same opera. This analysis will show how operational norms (Toury 1995) and different ways of negotiating the constraints imposed by the transmission channel and by reception factors produce different surtitles in the same language. It will also force us to challenge some of the basic concepts traditionally used in the study of translation.

 Marta Mateo

Towards this end, we may here borrow Díaz Cintas’s analysis model for subtitling (2003: 321–325), itself based on Lambert’s proposal for the descriptive analysis of translation (Lambert & Van Gorp 1985, and Lambert 1995), which proceeds from the preliminary parameters to the macrostructure and the microstructure of the subtitles under analysis, through the systemic context. For reasons of space, I shall limit my analysis of surtitling to the first two levels, but the systemic context will also be partly present in the comparison of different surtitles of the same opera at the macrostructural level.

2.1

Preliminary parameters

Surtitling fits in nicely in the description that Gambier and Gottlieb (2001: xi) give of audiovisual and multimedia translation, which share the following features: 1. teamwork is crucial, either simultaneously or cumulatively; 2. translators frequently work with “intermediate texts”, and their products mostly have a limited lifespan; and 3. the criteria applied to these types of translation are “comprehensibility […], accessibility and usability”. Various translation policies coexist nowadays for the production of surtitles, all of them marked by teamwork in different degrees: in the US, Canada, and some European countries there are some firms specializing in surtitling, which provide theatres or opera companies with translation and surtitling services, projection equipment and training for it; in other countries, like Spain, in which this type of firm has not yet been established, theatres create their own surtitles, turning to freelance translators/surtitlers – who sometimes work for different theatres – or to their own surtitling departments. Collaboration between theatres is not unusual. The process itself also varies and, whereas the above-mentioned firms tend to produce their surtitles from original translations, theatres either commission a new translation for any new production in their repertoire – which is the usual practice at the Royal Opera House (ROH) in London, and frequently at the Teatro Real in Madrid and the Liceo in Barcelona – or do the surtitles from existing translations of the libretto, using one or more target texts which they merge and adapt as suits their specific production best – the common practice at smaller theatres. The concept of translator (and of translation for that matter) is therefore a fussy one here, sometimes coinciding with that of surtitler, at other times materialising in different people. The surtitler is the producer of the target surtitles, for which s/he may originally have used other target texts which are not his/her own, and s/he will also normally be the operator projecting the titles during the performance. This division of roles in one and the same person is accurately put across by Bonwit (1998: 37) when he describes the work situation of the surtitles expert at The Washington Opera: “when [she] is at home creating titles and entering them in her PowerBook, she is an artist and she is paid by The Washington Opera. When she is in the booth and ‘pushes a button’ she is a stagehand – though still an artist – […] and is paid by the Kennedy Center [where the Opera performs].” In any of those systems, there must be constant coordination between the surtitler or surtitling company and most of the agents involved in the opera performance: above

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

all, with the conductor and stage director, for any possible musical cuts or textual changes which should be reflected in the titles as well as for certain projection decisions – e.g. whether to keep titles on in repetitions; but also with other less central members of staff, such as the person producing the programme notes, in order to agree on things like the spelling of characters’ names (see Burton 2004: 13, 15–16). Teamwork and the surtitler’s attendance at rehearsals are therefore vital for good quality surtitling. As regards Gambier & Gottlieb’s second feature of audiovisual and multimedial translation (above), we must here recall that an opera libretto is not autonomous, and the surtitles that translate it for the audience are made for one specific production, as they must be consistent with what is being sung and performed on that particular stage. This means that the surtitles for an opera belonging to one and the same company will probably have to be adapted for any other production of that work. Surtitling thus challenges – once more – the idea of a “definitive” translation for a text. This and the fact that in many cases a literal translation of the libretto is first done and then adapted to the time and format constraints of the new medium are probably the reasons why many opera companies and surtitlers refer to the production of surtitles as an adaptation.5 I share, however, Díaz Cintas’s reservations (2003: 32–35) to refer to the whole process of subtitling – in our case, surtitling – as one of adaptation, since it implies a restricted concept of translation as a process not constrained by technical and timing factors. Besides, many other surtitlers produce their texts directly from the sung text, which they translate with the surtitles already in mind. The distinction between translation and adaptation will probably have to be challenged in the case of multimedia translation. I would personally restrict the term adaptation to that phase in which a previous target text (usually a literal translation) is adjusted to the requirements of the screen transmission, in those cases in which surtitlers do adopt this translation policy. In any case, it would still be part of the overall process of surtitling, which is definitely a type of translation. This takes us to the relevance of Gambier and Gottlieb’s third feature to surtitling, as the criteria used to judge surtitles and the operational norms opted for by most surtitling companies greatly coincide with those quoted by these scholars as common to audiovisual and multimedia translation. Favourable comments on surtitles usually refer to their conciseness, clarity, coherence with the production and well-timed synchronisation. The following are extracts from reviews of the titles made by the Canadian surtitling company Aria Nuova: “true to the essence of the original text”; “clarity, taste, conciseness, flexibility, and humor”; “the option to choose alternate translations or to have title placement designed to match staging details makes them an outstanding artistic choice”.6 These have been written about Gunta Dreifelds’s titles – from SURTITLESTM, Canadian too: “perfect timing, always succinct and informative, and consistently appropriate to the action”; “helpful and unobtrusive”; “beautifully translated and tastefully projected”.7 And Sonya Friedman – who works for Opera North, in England – has earned these: “literate, concise, poetic and funny (where appropriate!), greatly enriching the opera experience for their audience.”8

 Marta Mateo

The comments, then, refer not just to the translation but also to questions related to format, projection, reception and the surtitles’ role in the production, i.e. they point to the nature of surtitles as multimedia texts. Indeed, the guidelines of surtitling companies and some theatres’ surtitlers concerning their translation practice all centre on ease of comprehension, clarity, transparency and agreement with the music and with the production, in different degrees. Since this extratextual information – though secondary to the translated texts themselves – is also valuable in reconstructing translational norms (Toury 1995: 65), let us here look at some of these guidelines from three of the companies whose surtitles will later illustrate translation strategies. SURTITLESTM bases its textual choices on:9 – Music – first and foremost; including cuts and repetitions – Direction – adapting existing titles for new productions, or creating new titles – Fades – to change titles unobtrusively. And they define their texts as “a capsulized translation”, a “condensation” rather than a translation,10 which suggests that the principle of economy is also an important one in their strategies and which, besides, may be interpreted as a sort of terminological precaution against a traditional concept of translation (= literal fidelity), in the same way that some drama translators choose to term their target texts adaptations to escape any accusations of their being too “free”. Aria Nuova favours comprehension by making the dialogue “sound like contemporary English, or at least ‘universal English’” and bases its distribution of the text into separate titles on three factors:11 the phrasing of the music in the score, the grammatical structure of the text and the time required to read a title on the screen. Jonathan Burton, a surtitler for London’s Royal Opera House, has expressed his ideas about surtitling in a recent paper, which may be taken as an explicit statement of his translation practice. He favours content over form: “[t]he aim of opera surtitles is to convey the meaning of what is being sung, not necessarily the manner in which it is being sung” (2004: 6), which implies that interjections and repetitions need not be included, the style and punctuation may be simplified, and the plot may need to be clarified. He also insists on the need for transparency – which is also often mentioned as a quality criterion in subtitling (see Morgan in Gambier & Gottlieb 2001: 164): “the surtitler must remember that the audience has come to see the opera, not the surtitles; the titles should be discreet and not distracting. […] The titler’s aim should be transparency, or even invisibility” (Burton 2004: 7). And the music and the production are seen as equally crucial: “It is also vital to obtain the correct version of the musical score in use for a particular production” (ibid.: 8). Many of the features mentioned in those extracts of metatextual information about surtitling (the distribution of titles; the need for them to follow the music, to respect grammar and meaning and to help follow the plot; the need for economy; the time of exposure; and the idea of transparency) refer to different aspects of the macrostructure, which is the level I shall study in the last part of this paper.

2.2

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

Macrostructure

Adapting Díaz Cintas’s model for subtitling (2003: 322) to our translation type, I shall here include the following elements: (1) division and distribution of the libretto into titles; (2) length of titles; (3) time of exposure; (4) punctuation; and (5) layout. They will be illustrated with the English surtitles for Richard Strauss’s Salomé, as devised by four surtitling companies/opera houses: two from Canada, SURTITLESTM and Aria Nuova; one from the US, Christopher Bergen Productions; and one from Britain, the Royal Opera House.12 By comparing texts in the same language we may focus on the way different surtitlers resort to different translation strategies, not because of linguistic reasons but because they differ in the ways they apply operational norms (Toury 1995) and solve the restrictions imposed by the new medium. I have previously studied the global translation strategy of some of these surtitlers in relation to the source verbal text, Lachmann’s German libretto, and to Oscar Wilde’s Salomé, on which the former was based (Mateo 2004). My interest here lies in the way these specific surtitles are representative of the translational norms and technical restrictions which constrain surtitling translation in general. For these purposes, a fragment has been selected which I consider both representative of the plot (Salomé’s encounter with Jokanaan) and long enough for the corresponding surtitles to be sufficiently illustrative of the elements analysed at this macrostructure level. It consists of 74 lines from the libretto, from “SALOME– ‘Wie abgezehrt er ist!’” to “JOKANAAN– ‘Zurück, Tochter Babylons! Durch das Weib kam das Übel in die Welt’”. 2.2.1 Division and distribution of titles The criteria for dividing the libretto into the surtitles seem to be slightly different if we take notice of the number of titles corresponding to the fragment selected and the texts in them. The ROH has used 34 titles, SURTITLESTM 28 titles, and Christopher Bergen 26 – most of which comprise two lines, and just a few one line.13 If we pay attention to the texts of these three companies (see examples in the Appendix), we may infer the following criteria: – The music (i.e. the tempo, the way in which the words develop in the score, the phrasing and cadences) seems to have priority in the ROH’s distribution of the text, although semantic variation is also considered: speeches from two different characters are very seldom placed in the same title while one sentence is sometimes split over two titles. The syntax has sometimes been adapted so that the division between titles is clear. The audience receives the text visually at the same time as it is sung, which allows the surtitler to eliminate interjections and vocatives that the audience may clearly identify from the performance. – SURTITLESTM seems to have taken the principle of economy, the functional nature of surtitles – as texts which must facilitate comprehension of the plot with a very discrete presence at the theatre – and the content as the main criteria in the

 Marta Mateo

selection and distribution of the texts: the aim seems to be to provide the audience with the essence of the sung text, so that they may reach a quick understanding without having to spend too much time reading. Thus, two sentences are often condensed into one, an image is never extended over two titles (even if it is in the singing), the lines of several characters are put together in the same surtitle, contractions are often used, and sentences are usually kept quite short. – Content and the functional nature of surtitles seem to have been the main criteria in Christopher Bergen’s division of titles: music is secondary to internal coherence and to the idea that each title should form a logical unit; Bergen seems to be well aware of the importance of the dramatic component in this particular opera and translates practically all the contents of the dialogues, condensing the text whenever necessary but never losing any important nuance. 2.2.2 Length of titles Surtitles normally consist of two lines with an average of 35–40 characters (including spaces and punctuation marks) per line. The length of those analysed here is this: – In the ROH’s surtitles the number of characters per line is never greater than 35, being, in fact, frequently much smaller (12, 18, 20, 21, 19, 30, 34, …); SURTITLESTM presents more variation in the length of lines (27, 22, 32, 19, 15, 38, 31, 7, 18, 28, …) and Ch. Bergen’s (37, 23, 19, 35, 28, 21, 37, 26, 17, …) and Aria Nuova’s (34, 19, 27, 38, 35, 22, 31, 37) are usually the longest. – The number of characters per title runs parallel to that per line: the ROH’s are the shortest (24, 48, 52, 37, 41, …) – this and the fact that the distribution of the text is guided by the music imply, as we have seen above, a larger number of titles, which in turn means that the audience will have to look at the screen more frequently (receiving, on the other hand, a text on the screen that is exactly parallel to that which is sung); SURTITLESTM has an average of 43 characters per title (38, 49, 46, 38, 58, 34, …); Ch. Bergen’s are again slightly longer, with an average of 47 (50, 42, 63, 58, 43, 26, …); and Aria Nuova has the longest ones, with an average of 52 characters in the smaller fragment at my disposal (38, 53, 43, 53, 72, …). 2.2.3 Time of exposure The time of exposure of opera surtitles, closely linked to the previous factors, is mainly determined by the musical tempo and is much more variable than it is in subtitling: since the verbal language interpreted by the written text on the surtitling screen is not spoken but sung, its rhythm is not a natural one, which implies that the vocal text may sometimes last longer than it takes the spectator to read the written text, while at other times the surtitles will have to follow one another at a rapid pace, particularly in ensembles. A look at the extract from Aria Nuova’s surtitles for Salomé shows this variation in the time of exposure of each title: the number of seconds per title varies from 12.5 to 07.8, 13.4, 11.5, 08.9, 09.2, 05.5, even 16.0. We may also see there that the six-

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

second rule common in subtitling is too short for surtitles: many of them will be projected for twice as long or even longer. Another thing which may be remarked on in Aria Nuova’s extract is the absence of any blank title, which is also the case with Ch. Bergen’s surtitles, as opposed to the ROH’s and those by SURTITLESTM. Many surtitlers, like the latter, insert a blank title between titles, particularly when it takes less time to read a particular caption than the singer to sing it, or in repetitions. Audiences normally welcome the relief of a little time with no text so that they may concentrate on the stage. Nevertheless, the fact that Aria Nuova’s and Bergen’s surtitles do not include any blank ones does not imply that their audiences will not have them, as synchronisation is not predetermined in surtitling – as opposed to subtitling – but done live at the performance – since the rhythm of the singing and the music will vary in each production, even each night – and it is usually the director’s decision to keep or withdraw a surtitle when the singing lasts too long. In any case, to give an idea of the experience of opera reception with surtitles, we may use the times suggested in Aria Nuova’s extract, which show us that the audience have to read quite quickly and develop a habit for this kind of reception; otherwise they will miss much of the performance on the stage, for, while the singing time for that fragment in my recording is approximately 3’50’’, the combined time of exposure of all these surtitles is 3’05’’. 2.2.4 Punctuation Punctuation is not uniform in surtitling and although it is normally kept very simple, each house follows its own practice, as can be seen in the extracts shown here: the ROH uses all punctuation marks but follows the common convention of not using full stops at the end of sentences, and marking the continuation of a sentence in the next title by means of dots and different characters’ speeches in the same title by means of dashes; on the other hand, SURTITLESTM uses very basic punctuation, with no dashes or exclamation marks, but does use full stops to end sentences. Aria Nuova and Ch. Bergen use all punctuation marks, including the dashes mentioned above as well as the dots to continue a sentence. Bergen’s punctuation is in fact rather meticulous, as can be observed in his meaningful use of lower-case letters for Salomé’s mention of the “son of man” (in one of the examples provided), as opposed to Jokanaan’s “the Son of Man”, thus reflecting her – and other people’s – ignorance of Jesus Christ at the time. 2.2.5 Layout There is also variation in the format of titles, depending on the screen and projection system of the theatre in question. The ROH, at Covent Garden, shows white lettering on a dark screen and the text on it is centred (Burton 2004: 3, 8). This is also the layout used by SURTITLESTM at the Canadian Opera Company, while that of Aria Nuova’s surtitles – which also appear centred on the screen – and of Ch. Bergen’s will probably depend on the client using them (the colour varies, from white to red or yellow; the font is usually Arial or Helvetica and the texts will normally be either centred or aligned on the left).

 Marta Mateo

3. Conclusion Many different factors intervene in surtitling products: the textual nature of the source text, contextual and reception factors, translation policies and norms, and technical constraints. The translation norms adopted by surtitling companies, though coincident in most respects, may produce different target texts in the same language, since they are combined with differing ways of prioritising the multiple elements which come together in these multimedia texts – music, content, projection, production, style, etc. – and of solving the space and time restrictions involved in the process. The choice between criteria such as clarity, content, transparency, economy, etc. gives rise to different title distributions and punctuation usages. These, together with the time of exposure and the surtitles layout, will inevitably affect audience reception. In fact, the very existence of surtitles has utterly changed opera reception, as they have brought with them a new way of watching opera, one which is more enriching but also more active, requiring some effort on the part of the audience but, in turn, affording them a fuller enjoyment of the operatic experience. Finally, the study of surtitling invites us to reconsider certain concepts traditionally used in translation theory and asserts the applicability of the Function-oriented Descriptive Translation Studies approach to the study of multimedia translation.

Notes 1. Peter Low attributes the “rapid spread of surtitling” to the fact that it has served to solve two traditional problems in opera: intelligibility and cost (2002: 98–9). Audiences’ enthusiasm for surtitles is reflected in the fact that most opera houses mention them in their bills, brochures and/or webpages and in that surtitles now have a bearing on ticket prices (which shows that audiences are not prepared to pay the same price for seats which do not offer a view of surtitles as for those which do) (see Mateo 2002: 66). Besides, it is generally agreed that surtitles are clearly behind the increase in the size of opera audiences (see Dewolf, 2001: 187 and Mateo 2002: 66–67) but detractors also find some negative effects on audiences’ attitude at the performance, on certain countries’ national opera production and particularly on sung translations, as Everett-Green deplores in an article with the significant title “A Surfeit of Surtitles” (2004: R3): “Surtitles have become such a part of opera culture that sung translations seem almost exotic.” 2. For the advantages and disadvantages of each of the different methods see Burton 2004 and Mateo 2002. 3.

The word supertitles seems to be preferred in the USA.

4. www.glimmerglass.org/insights/diary/wk5/titles.htm 5. “La adaptación de los sobretítulos está realizada por un equipo especializado con larga experiencia profesional, que lleva haciéndolos desde la reinauguración del Real en la temporada 97–98” (personal communication from the Departamento de Protocolo y Relaciones Externas of the Teatro Real in Madrid). “Nosotros trabajamos con la traducción del texto íntegro del li-

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

breto (que incorporamos en el programa de mano), normalmente encargada a un equipo de traductores. A partir de ahí realizamos la adaptación para sobretitulado, teniendo especialmente en cuenta la música y las características de la producción concreta que se ofrece” (personal communication from the Responsable de sobretítulos at the Gran Teatro del Liceu in Barcelona). (My italics) 6. www.aria-nuova.com/commend.html 7.

www.surtitles.com/praise.html

8. www.operanorth.org/Sonya.html 9. www.surtitles.com 10. “I’d like to emphasize that my work is a CONDENSATION, not really a translation, because the text is for surtitles” (personal communication from Gunta Dreifelds). 11. www.aria-nuova.com/transl.htm 12. The ROH’s surtitles for Salomé were not made by the surtitler mentioned in the previous section, but by Peter Kreiss. 13. I only had a smaller fragment of Aria Nuova’s at my disposal, but the number of titles in it coincided with the corresponding one of SURTITLESTM, being larger than C. Bergen’s and smaller than the ROH’s.

Appendix 1. Libretto SALOME. […] Ich möchte ihn näher beseh’n. NARRABOTH. Nein, nein, Prinzessin. SALOME. Ich muß ihn näher beseh’n. Surtitles ROH 825. I want to look at him more closely 830. 835. I must look at him more closely SURTITLESTM 111. I’d like to see him closer. No. I must. Ch. Bergen 21. -I want to gaze upon him. -No, Princess! -I must! [Note. I have not got Aria Nuova’s texts for this passage.] 2. Libretto JOKANAAN.

Tochter Sodoms, Komm mir nicht nahe! Vielmehr bedecke dein Gesicht mit einem Schleier, streue Asche auf deinen Kopf, mach dich auf in die Wüste und suche des Menschen Sohn!

 Marta Mateo SALOME. Wer ist das, des Menschen Sohn? Ist er so schön wie du, Jokanaan? Surtitles ROH 920. Daughter of Sodom! Do not come near me 925. Cover your face with a veil Scatter ashes upon your head 930. Go into the desert and seek out the Son of Man 935. 940. Who is he, the Son of Man? 945. 950. Is he as beautiful as you, Jokanaan? SURTITLESTM 122. Daughter of Sodom, don’t come near me. 123. Cover your face, and scatter ashes on your head. 124. Go to the desert and seek the Son of God. 125. Who is that? 126. Is he as beautiful as you? Ch. Bergen 31. Daughter of Sodom, approach me not! 32. Wear a veil and cover yourself with ashes, and go to the desert. 33. Seek there the Son of Man. 34. Who is this son of man? Is he as beautiful as you, Jokanaan? Aria Nuova 116. Daughter of Sodom, don’t come near me! Cover your face with a veil… 117. scatter ashes on your head, go to the desert… 118. …and search for the Son of Man. 119. Who is he, this Son of Man? 120. Is he as beautiful as you, Jokanaan?

Reception, text and context in the study of opera surtitles 

References Texts Strauss, Richard. Salome. – libretto: http://www.weblaopera.com – CD recording: Sony Classical, Berliner Philarmoniker, Zubin Mehta, 1991. – Surtitles from: – Aria Nuova, Canada – Christopher Bergen Productions, EEUU. – Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, London. – SURTITLESTM, Canadian Opera House, Toronto.

Web pages http://www.aria-nuova.com http://www.glimmerglass.org http://www.operanorth.org http://www.surtitles.com http://www.teatro-real.com

Secondary sources Apter, Ronnie. 1985. “A Peculiar Burden: Some Technical Problems of Translating Opera for Performance in English”. META 30/4: 309–319. Assis Rosa, Alexandra. 2001. “Features of Oral and Written Communication in Subtitling”. In (Multi)media translation. Concepts, Practices, and Research, Y. Gambier and H. Gottlieb (eds), 213–221. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bonwit, Stuart. 1998. “Mac at the Opera”. Washington Apple Pi Journal May/June 1998: 30–37. Burton, Jonathan. 2004. “The Joy of Opera: the Art and Craft of Subtitling and Surtitling”. Paper presented at In so many words. Language transfer on the screen. London, 6–7 February 2004. Dewolf, Linda. 2001. “Surtitling Operas. With Examples of Translations from German into French and Dutch”. In (Multi)media translation. Concepts, Practices, and Research, Y. Gambier and H. Gottlieb (eds), 179–188. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Díaz Cintas, Jorge. 2003. Teoría y práctica de la subtitulación. Inglés – Español. Barcelona: Ariel. Everett-Green, Robert. 2004. “A Surfeit of Surtitles”. The Globe and Mail – Canada. Monday, January 5, 2004, page R3. Gambier, Yves and Gottlieb, Henrik (eds). 2001. (Multi)media translation. Concepts, Practices, and Research. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Glick, Robert M. 1987. “The (Translated) Sound of Music”. In Across the Language Gap, K. Kummer (ed.), 221–226. Medford, N.J.: Learned Information Inc. Lambert, José. 1995. “Literary Translation. Research update”. In La traducció literària, J. Marco Borillo (ed.), 19–42. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I. Lambert, José and Van Gorp, Hendrick. 1985. “On Describing Translations”. In The Manipulation of Literature, Th. Hermans (ed.), 42–53. London & Sidney: Croom Helm.

 Marta Mateo Low, Peter. 2002. “Surtitles for Opera. A Specialised Translating Task”. Babel 48, 2: 97–110. Mateo, Marta. 1994. “El nivel fonológico del lenguaje en el proceso de traducción”. In La traducción de lo inefable, A. Bueno García et al. (eds), 75–89. Soria: Depto. de Publicaciones del Colegio Universitario de Soria. Mateo, Marta. 2002. “Los sobretítulos de ópera: dimensión técnica, textual, social e ideológica”. In Traductores para todo. Actas de las III Jornadas de doblaje y subtitulación, J. Sanderson (ed.), 51–73. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante. Mateo, Marta. 2004. “La traducción de Salomé para distintos públicos y escenarios”. In Trasvases Culturales: Literatura / Cine / Traducción, R. Merino et al. (eds), 225–242. Vitoria: Universidad del País Vasco. Rubiera Fernández, Javier 1993. Entre la ópera y el teatro Noh: hacia una estética comparada de la representación dramático-musical. Unpublished PhD, Universidad de Oviedo: Departamento de Filología Española. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? Features of (non-)efficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive Helle V. Dam Aarhus School of Business, University of Aarhus, Denmark

This paper sets out to test three hypotheses aimed at identifying features of efficiency and non-efficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive – defined here as note-taking features that correlate with high target-text quality, on the one hand, and with poor target-text quality, on the other. The hypotheses, which were generated on the basis of empirical findings from a pilot study, are as follows: (1) the more the notes, the better the target text, (2) the more the abbreviations/the fewer the full words, the better the target text, and (3) the more the notes in the source language/the fewer in the target language, the better the target text. The hypotheses are tested on data comprising the target texts and notes produced by five interpreters working from Spanish into Danish.

Keywords: consecutive interpreting, note-taking, target-text quality, note efficiency, accuracy

1. Introduction The study reported on in this paper is part of an ongoing research project on consecutive interpreters’ notes, conducted in collaboration with Jan Engberg at the Aarhus School of Business. The aim of the project is to explore the role of interpreters’ notes in consecutive target-text production and, in particular, to study which note-taking features appear to lead to the production of good target texts, and which do not, i.e. features of efficiency and non-efficiency in interpreters’ notes. So far, we have carried out and reported on two studies leading up to the present one. In the first paper (Dam et al. 2005), we reported on the pilot stage of the study, in which we focused on the search for a method, or tool, that would allow us to identify

 Helle V. Dam

‘good’ – and conversely not so good – target texts, i.e. to assess target-text quality. In addition, based on our first assessments of target-text quality, we analysed a small sample of interpreters’ notes with the purpose of generating some initial hypotheses about features of efficiency and non-efficiency, respectively, in interpreters’ notes. In the second paper reporting on our on-going project (Dam & Engberg 2006), we presented our continued work on quality assessment methods. Here we argued that accuracy may be regarded as a particularly central component of the multifaceted notion of quality in a study on interpreters’ notes, as the very raison d’être of notes is to ensure an accurate rendition of source-text meaning. Consequently, we have chosen to use target-text accuracy as an indicator of target-text quality – and hence ultimately of note efficiency. As our work on quality, or accuracy, assessment has been described in detail elsewhere, it will not be the central topic of the present paper. Rather, this paper will follow up on the hypotheses on features of efficiency in note-taking generated in the context of our pilot study. Thus, we shall present the results of a series of analyses that we have conducted in order to corroborate, falsify or modify our initial hypotheses. After a presentation of the hypotheses in Section 2, a short description of the data on which they are tested is given in Section 3. Section 4 introduces the analyses, the results of which are presented in Section 5. Finally, our conclusions are drawn up and discussed in Section 6.

2. Hypotheses As explained, the hypotheses to be tested here are based on the results of a small pilot study on the efficiency of interpreters’ notes. The pilot analyses were based on two extracts of notes produced by the same interpreter, where one extract had been used for the production of a target-text passage that was assessed as highly accurate, whereas the other had been used for a target-text passage that was assessed as highly inaccurate. The analyses were exploratory, and the idea was to search for possible differences between the two extracts of notes and especially to look for correlations between particular note characteristics and high target-text accuracy, on the one hand, and high targettext inaccuracy, on the other. The exploratory analyses yielded three sets of correlations, namely (1) in terms of note quantity: a correlation between relatively many notes and target-text accuracy, and a correlation between relatively few notes and target-text inaccuracy; (2) in terms of note form: a correlation between relatively many abbreviations/few full words in the notes and target-text accuracy, and a correlation between relatively many full words/few abbreviations and target-text inaccuracy; and (3) in terms of note language: a correlation between relatively many notes in the source language/few in the target language and target-text accuracy, and a correlation between relatively many notes in the target language/few in the source language and target-text inaccuracy. No other correlations were found in the exploratory analyses.

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

Based on the correlations we were able to identify, we formulated the following three hypotheses:1 1. the more the notes, the better the target text – and vice versa 2. the more the abbreviations/the fewer the full words, the better the target text – and vice versa 3. the more the notes in the source language/the fewer in the target language, the better the target text – and vice versa Readers are referred to Dam et al. (2005) for a detailed discussion of the three hypotheses, including their possible interrelations, plausibility and position with respect to existing theories and current thinking in the field of interpreting. (For a shorter discussion of the hypotheses, see also Section 6 below.)

3. Data The data on the basis of which the above hypotheses will be tested are drawn from a corpus generated in a simulated conference with consecutive interpreting between Spanish and Danish. The corpus comprises (1) one Spanish speech, which served as the source text (hereafter the source text, or ST), (2) five consecutive interpretations of this speech into Danish (hereafter the target texts, or TTs), and (3) the corresponding five sets of notes. The source text was delivered by a native speaker of Spanish, whereas the target texts and the notes were produced by five professional interpreters with similar backgrounds. Their A-language was Danish, and Spanish was their B- or C-language. The source text was an argumentative speech on drug policy – a much-debated topic at the time of data collection. The interpreters were well acquainted with the topic and had time to prepare for the task beforehand. Thus, topic familiarity was relatively high for all five interpreters. The source and target texts were recorded during the simulated conference and subsequently transcribed. For the purpose of the analyses, the source text, which consisted of 1092 words, was divided into 16 smaller units – referred to as paragraphs here – according to semantic criteria. The average length of the paragraphs was 68.25 words. Following the source-text division, each of the five target texts was also divided into 16 units, or paragraphs, and so was each of the five sets of notes. Thus, the corpus comprises a total of 16 source-text paragraphs, 80 target-text paragraphs, and the corresponding 80 subsets of notes.

 Helle V. Dam

4. Analyses As mentioned, in the context of our ongoing project, we have conducted analyses of two kinds, namely (1) comparative source-target-text analyses aimed at identifying different degrees of target-text accuracy and (2) analyses of the corresponding notes in order to find out whether particular note-taking characteristics correlate with the different degrees of target-text accuracy identified through the first analyses.

4.1

Analyses of target-text accuracy

As described in detail in Dam & Engberg (2006), the comparative source-target-text analyses also comprised two types of analyses: semantic network analyses, i.e. a formal type of analysis, and intuitive analyses, in which a number of independent assessors were asked to assess the target texts for accuracy with respect to the source text. The purpose of the double accuracy analysis was to compare the two methods and the results they yielded in order to test their validity as tools for the identification of accuracy. One important conclusion was that each of the methods appears to be valid per se, insofar as the results that each of them yielded converged to a very high degree. We shall not go further into this comparison here, as it has been described in detail previously. Rather, we shall limit ourselves to giving a brief description of the intuitive analyses, as the analyses of the notes reported on in this paper take these analyses as their direct point of departure, as described below. The intuitive assessments of target-text accuracy were performed by a group of independent assessors. The assessors were seven interpreting students from the Aarhus School of Business, who made the assessments approximately three weeks before their final exams, i.e. at a time when they were well acquainted with interpreting norms and strategies in general and with the concept of accuracy in particular. The subjects made the assessments on the basis of comparisons of transcripts of source and target texts. As mentioned in Section 3, the transcripts were divided into 16 paragraphs, and the assessors evaluated each of the target-text paragraphs of the corpus (a total of 80) for semantic accuracy with respect to the corresponding source-text paragraph.2 Following the methodology proposed in e.g. Gile (1999), each paragraph was rated on a scale from 1 to 5 – 1 being ‘very inaccurate’ and 5 being ‘very accurate’. (For a detailed description and discussion of this analysis and its results, see Dam & Engberg 2006). These assessments, then, allowed us to identify different degrees of accuracy in the target-text paragraphs, and served as the point of departure for the second kind of analyses, i.e. the analyses of the notes.

4.2

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

Analyses of the notes

The notes analyses carried out in order to test the hypotheses presented in Section 2 consist of two sub-analyses using different selection criteria. For the first sub-analysis we simply selected the notes corresponding to the target-text paragraphs that had received the highest and the lowest accuracy scores in the corpus as a whole, independent of which interpreter had produced the paragraphs in question. Thus, we analysed the notes corresponding to those target-text paragraphs that had received accuracy scores either (1) above a total of 32 points (i.e. 33 points or more) or (2) below a total of 14 points (i.e. 13 points or less) between the seven assessors. In the first case the renditions were considered highly accurate, and in the second they were considered highly inaccurate. (As mentioned, the renditions were rated on a scale between 1 and 5, which means that – with seven assessors – the maximum score is 35 points and the minimum score is 5 points.) These selection criteria yielded a total of seven paragraphs that were identified as highly accurate, and eight which were identified as highly inaccurate, i.e. a similar number of paragraphs in each category. In the analyses, the notes for the highly accurate target-text paragraphs were compared with the notes for the highly inaccurate targettext paragraphs in order to find out if the two sets of notes differed on the parameters under investigation, i.e. note quantity, note form and note language. However, it turned out that the above selection criteria produced a non-neglible bias: the seven highly accurate paragraphs were produced almost exclusively by two of the five interpreters in the experiment (subjects 3 and 4), whereas the eight highly inaccurate paragraphs were produced mainly by two other interpreters (subjects 1 and 5). Thus, although it was not the intention, this first sub-analysis turned out to be largely intersubjective, insofar as it entailed comparisons between the performances of two interpreters, on the one hand, and those of two other interpreters, on the other (cf. Section 5.1 below). Clearly, this bias entails the risk that the analysis singles out differences in note-taking characteristics that are due to individual preferences or abilities rather than associated with the dependent or the independent variables of the study, i.e. target-text accuracy and note-taking efficiency. Therefore, to complement this first – largely intersubjective – analysis of the notes, we also conducted an intrasubjective analysis, which focused on the interpreters’ individual performances. For this analysis we selected, within each subject’s notes, the three subsets of notes corresponding to the three target-text paragraphs that had received the highest accuracy scores among the sixteen paragraphs produced by the interpreter in question, on the one hand, and the notes for the three renditions with the lowest scores, on the other hand. These two sets of notes were then compared for differences. The intrasubjective analysis is superior to the intersubjective analysis insofar as it eliminates the risk that individual note-taking preferences influence the results excessively. But, on the other hand, it is not unproblematic either, as it allows for somewhat misleading classifications in certain cases. For example, a TT-paragraph classified as one of the three most inaccurate renditions in one interpreter’s performance may in

 Helle V. Dam

fact have received a relatively high score in the accuracy assessments; it just happened to be less accurate than most of the other renditions produced by that – generally very accurate – interpreter. And vice versa. Therefore, none of the methods – neither the inter- nor the intrasubjective one – is without its flaws, but together they turned out to complement each other well, as will become clear below.

5. Results In the presentation of the results, we shall address each of the three hypotheses in turn: the first hypothesis in Section 5.1, the second one in Section 5.2, and the third in Section 5.3. Each of the hypotheses is examined through both an intersubjective and an intrasubjective analysis, as explained above.

5.1

Hypothesis 1: note quantity

As stated in Section 2, the first hypothesis runs as follows: “the more notes, the better the target text – and vice versa”. This hypothesis therefore postulates a relationship between note quantity and target-text quality. In order to test the hypothesis, we compared the quantity of notes – measured as the number of source-text words per note unit – used for target-text paragraphs that had received high accuracy scores with the quantity of notes used for target-text paragraphs with low accuracy scores. The results of the so-called intersubjective analysis, i.e. the analysis of the notes for the most accurate and most inaccurate renditions in the corpus as a whole, are shown in Table 1 below: Table 1. Intersubjective analysis of note quantity: number of source-text words per note unit for the 7 most accurate and the 8 most inaccurate TT-paragraphs in the corpus. Most accurate TT-paragraphs

2–1

3–2

3–3

3–13

4–2

4–8

4–15

Average

ST-words per note

1.73

3.27

4.33

2.79

2.45

4.04

3.05

3.09

1–7

1–8

1–12

2–9

5–3

5–7

5–11

5–15

Average

3.67

4.22

3.54

3.83

6.50

5.50

7.18

5.33

4.97

Most inaccurate TT-paragraphs ST-words per note

Before we proceed to discussing the results, a note of explanation to Table 1 will be in order. The TT-paragraphs are named by means of two numbers connected with a hyphen, for example 2–1. The number to the left of the hyphen refers to a particular subject (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5), whereas the number to the right refers to the number of the

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

TT-paragraph in question (between 1 and 16) in that particular subject’s rendition. Thus, in Table 1, we can see that three of the seven most accurate TT-paragraphs are produced by subject number 3, and that another three are produced by subject number 4. Also, three of the eight most inaccurate TT-paragraphs are produced by subject number 1, and four are produced by subject number 5. In fact, only subject 2 has renditions in both the most-accurate and the most-inaccurate categories. Hence the risk of results that are biased by individual preferences in this not deliberately, but still mainly intersubjective analysis. As for the results, Table 1 shows that, generally, relatively many notes do in fact seem to correlate with accurate renditions, whereas relatively few notes correlate with inaccurate target texts. Thus, in the rightmost column we can see that the most accurate TT-paragraphs are produced on the basis of an average representation of 3.09 ST-words per note unit, whereas the corresponding number for the most inaccurate TT-paragraphs is 4.97, i.e. approximately 60% more ST-words per note unit. (Note that, because the measure used to identify note quantity here is the number of sourcetext words per note unit, high numbers indicate few notes, whereas low numbers indicate many notes). Also if we look at the individual performances, we can see that, generally, the lowest note quantities (i.e. the highest numbers) tend to appear in the most-inaccurate category (e.g. 7.18), whereas the highest note quantities (i.e. the lowest numbers) are to be found in the most-accurate category (e.g. 1.73). But even if this is the general pattern, there are also some exceptions. For example, fewer notes have been used to produce the highly accurate rendition number 3–3 than to produce the highly inaccurate rendition number 1–12. Thus, the picture is not entirely clear from this analysis alone. To complement this largely intersubjective analysis with an analysis from which the possible effects of individual preferences were eliminated, we then conducted an intrasubjective analysis, which focused on the relationship between target-text accuracy and note quantity within subjects. The results of this analysis are represented in Table 2 below: Table 2. Intrasubjective analysis of note quantity: average number of source-text words per note unit for the 3 most accurate and the 3 most inaccurate TT-paragraphs in each of the five subjects’ performances. ST-words per note

Subjects

Most accurate TT-paragraphs Most inaccurate TT-paragraphs

1

2

3

4

5

2.74 3.81

2.45 4.77

3.46 4.98

3.18 4.71

3.04 6.00

From the intrasubjective analysis as represented in Table 2, the general pattern observed in the so-called intersubjective analysis emerges even more clearly. Thus, all five

 Helle V. Dam

subjects wrote more notes in order to produce the three most accurate target-text paragraphs than s/he did for the three most inaccurate ones, and there is therefore a rather clear correlation between relatively many notes and a high degree of accuracy and between relatively few notes and a low degree of accuracy. It is interesting to note that, in spite of the clear overall pattern, the number of notes used to produce the same categories of renditions varies somewhat from interpreter to interpreter (between 2.45 and 3.46 ST-words per note unit for the most accurate renditions, and between 3.81 and 6.00 for the most inaccurate). This variation would indicate individual note-taking styles or preferences, whereas the overall correlations between note quantity and target-text accuracy indicate the existence of general trends beyond individual variation. (This observation is discussed further in Section 5.2 below.) All in all, the results of the so-called intersubjective analysis in combination with the intrasubjective analysis tend to support the hypothesized relationship between note quantity and target-text quality and more specifically the hypothesis under scrutiny, i.e. “the more notes, the better the target text – and vice versa”.

5.2

Hypothesis 2: note form

In stating that “the more abbreviations/fewer full words, the better the target text – and vice versa”, the second hypothesis postulates a relationship between note form and target-text quality. In order to test the hypothesis, we compared the quantity of abbreviations vs. full words in the notes used for target-text paragraphs that had received high accuracy scores with the quantity of abbreviations vs. full words in the notes used for target-text paragraphs with low accuracy scores. The results of the so-called intersubjective analysis are shown in Table 3 below. Note that, apart from the categories of abbreviations and full words, in the analyses of note form we worked with a third category, namely symbols. However, as this third category is not relevant for the hypothesis we are currently testing, the tables in this section do not include the results regarding symbols, but only those related to abbreviations and full words.3 Percentages rather than absolute numbers are used in order to make the results comparable across units of varying length, but as the tables do not include the results for symbols, the percentages do not add up to 100. As shown in Table 3, there is a relatively stable correlation between high targettext accuracy and a relatively high proportion of abbreviations and a smaller quantity of full words. Also, there is a clear correlation between target-text inaccuracy and a relatively high proportion of full words and a smaller quantity of abbreviations. Thus, in the rightmost column of Table 3 we can see that, on average, the most accurate TTparagraphs are produced on the basis of fewer full words than abbreviations (25% and 40%, respectively), and that the most inaccurate TT-paragraphs are rendered on the basis of more full words than abbreviations (44% and 13%, respectively).

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

Table 3. Intersubjective analysis of note form: percentages of full words and abbreviations in the notes for the 7 most accurate and the 8 most inaccurate TT-paragraphs in the corpus. Most accurate TT-paragraphs

2–1

3–2

3–3

3–13

4–2

Full words

27%

27%

52%

26%

Abbreviations

47%

60%

38%

18%

1–7

1–8

1–12

25% 25%

43% 17%

54% -

Most inaccurate TT-paragraphs Full words Abbreviations

4–8

4–15

Average

10%

7%

24%

25%

35%

44%

38%

40%

2–9

5–3

5–7

5–11

5–15

Average

33% -

50% 21%

63% -

45% 27%

42% 17%

44% 13%

This cross-correlation which can be observed at the general level also applies to almost all the individual performances. The only exceptions are the notes for paragraphs 3–3 and 3–13 – two of the most accurate renditions, which are nevertheless based on notes consisting of more full words than abbreviations (cf. Table 3). It is worth noting here that the notes for the two paragraphs in question are produced by the same interpreter, namely subject number 3. These deviations from the general pattern may therefore in principle be due to individual note-taking preferences, in this case a preference for full words. In fact, the next analysis – the intrasubjective analysis of note form – intriguingly shows that, although subject 3 is indeed a true “word-interpreter” (i.e. s/he generally uses many full words for note-taking), s/he too performs better when using relatively more abbreviations and fewer full words. The results of the intrasubjective analysis are represented in Table 4 below: Table 4. Intrasubjective analysis of note form: average proportion of full words and abbreviations in the notes for the three most accurate and the three most inaccurate TTparagraphs in each of the five subjects’ performances.

Full words Most accurate Most inaccurate Abbreviations Most accurate Most inaccurate

Subject 1

Subject 2

Subject 3

Subject 4

Subject 5

30% 41%

22% 31%

35% 54%

14% 24%

15% 50%

28% 14%

33% 16%

39% 20%

39% 35%

48% 15%

As can be derived from Table 4, the notes produced by subject 3 consist of 35% full words for his/her most accurate renditions, but as many as 54% for his/her most inaccurate ones. As for abbreviations, the percentage is 39% in his/her notes for the three most accurate renditions, but only 20% in the notes for the three most inaccurate ones.

 Helle V. Dam

The same pattern can be observed in the performances of the other four subjects: they all have a smaller proportion of full words in the notes for their most accurate renditions than for their most inaccurate ones, just as they all use more abbreviations in the notes for their most accurate renditions than for their most inaccurate ones. The crosscorrelation is therefore clear enough: target-text accuracy correlates with fewer full words and more abbreviations, whereas target-text inaccuracy correlates with more full words and fewer abbreviations. Thus, all in all, the results of the intersubjective analysis in combination with the intrasubjective analysis seem to support the hypothesized relationship between note form and target-text quality and more specifically the hypothesis under investigation, i.e. “the more abbreviations/the fewer full words, the better the target text – and vice versa”. Again it is interesting to note that, despite the rather clear general trends outlined above, the exact quantity of words and abbreviations used varies immensely from interpreter to interpreter. For example, subject 4 uses very few words and many abbreviations overall, whereas with subjects 1 and 3 it is the other way around: they generally use many full words and fewer abbreviations. This observation is of interest, insofar as the variations in the interpreters’ performances indicate the existence of personal or individual note-taking preferences and styles – a point often made in the literature (e.g. Seleskovitch 1975; Thiéry 1981) – whereas the correlations point to the existence of regularities beyond the individual variations. Moving up one level of abstraction, this implies that research into note-taking is purposeful, which it would not be if note-taking was entirely governed by individual preferences.

5.3

Hypothesis 3: note language

In stating that “the more notes in the source language/the fewer in the target language, the better the target text – and vice versa”, the third hypothesis postulates a relationship between note language and target-text quality. In order to test the hypothesis, we compared the quantity of source-language units vs. target-language units in the notes for target-text paragraphs that had received high accuracy scores with the quantity of source-language vs. target-language units in the notes for target-text paragraphs with low accuracy scores. The results of the so-called intersubjective analysis are shown in Table 5 below. Note that, apart from the categories of source language (SL) and target language (TL), in the analyses of note language we worked with two additional categories, namely ‘third language’ and a ‘cannot-be-determined’ category for notes that would be identical in several languages (e.g. legal). However, as the latter two categories are not relevant for the hypothesis we are currently testing, the tables in this section do not include the results regarding these, which is also why the percentages do not add up to 100.

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

Table 5. Intersubjective analysis of note language: percentages of notes in the source language and the target language in the notes for the 7 most accurate and the 8 most inaccurate TT-paragraphs in the corpus. Most accurate TT-paragraphs

2–1

3–2

3–3

3–13

4–2

4–8

4–15

Average

SL-notes TL-notes

18% 45%

92%

79%

80%

78%

7% 64%

85%

4% 75%

1–7

1–8

1–12

2–9

5–3

5–7

5–11

5–15

Average

67%

64% 29%

14% 86%

33% 67%

40% 30%

20% 80%

25% 50%

86%

25% 62%

Most inaccurate TT-paragraphs SL-notes TL-notes

From Table 5 it is clear that there is an overall dominance of notes in the target language. Thus, the target language dominates in the notes for the most accurate as well as for the most inaccurate renditions. The only accuracy-language relationship that can be perceived is a higher proportion of notes in the source language for the most inaccurate renditions than for the most accurate ones. Thus, in the notes for the most inaccurate target-text paragraphs there is both a higher average proportion of SL-notes than in the notes for the most accurate renditions (25% vs. 4%), and six individual cases of SL-presence (in the notes for paragraphs 1–8, 1–12, 2–9, 5–3, 5–7 and 5–11), including two cases of dominance of SL-notes over TL-notes (in 1–8 and 5–3). On the other hand, there are only two cases of SL-presence in the notes for the most accurate renditions (18% in 2–1 and 7% in 4–8). Therefore, if anything, source-language notation seems to be linked with target-text inaccuracy rather than with target-text accuracy, which is clearly in contradiction with our hypothesis. The second analysis of note language, i.e. the intrasubjective analysis, does little to clarify the issue, as can be derived from Table 6 below: Table 6. Intrasubjective analysis of note language: average proportion of notes in the source language and the target language in the notes for the 3 most accurate and the 3 most inaccurate TT-paragraphs in each of the five subjects’ performances.

SL-notes Most accurate Most inaccurate TL-notes Most accurate Most inaccurate

Subject 1

Subject 2

Subject 3

Subject 4

Subject 5

30% 26%

17% 11%

– –

2% –

10% 86%

46% 61%

51% 68%

84% 92%

76% 81%

61% 72%

 Helle V. Dam

In Table 6, we can see that the results of the complementary intrasubjective analysis are convergent with the so-called intersubjective analysis on one point only: the overall dominance of notes in the target language. Apart from this convergence, the results of the intrasubjective analyses do not support the pattern found in the intersubjective one. Thus, all subjects write slightly more notes in the target language for their most inaccurate renditions than for their most accurate ones. The pattern of SL-notes is less clear. In the performances of subjects 1 and 2, there are slightly more notes in the source language for the most accurate renditions than for the most inaccurate ones, but subject 3 has no SL-notes at all, subject 4 has practically none (2%), and although subject 5 has more TL-notes for his/her most inaccurate renditions, then s/he has more SL-notes for these renditions than for the most accurate ones. On the whole, the results of the intrasubjective analysis on note language are rather unclear, but if anything, they show a vague correlation between target-text inaccuracy and notes in the target language. This result therefore tends to support our original hypothesis, but it is in contradiction with the results of the so-called intersubjective analysis. All in all, the only conclusion we are able to draw based on the two analyses on note language is that the target language seems to be the dominant choice of language for the notes, whereas the source language is used much less.

6. Conclusion and discussion In this paper we have tested three hypotheses regarding features of efficiency vs. non-efficiency in interpreters’ notes for consecutive. The first hypothesis, “the more notes, the better the target text – and vice versa”, was largely supported by the results of the analyses of note quantity presented in Section 5.1. The second hypothesis, “the more abbreviations/fewer full words, the better the target text – and vice versa”, was also generally corroborated by the analyses of note form presented in Section 5.2. The third hypothesis, “the more notes in the source language/the fewer in the target language, the better the target text – and vice versa”, could not be supported by the analyses of note language presented in Section 5.3, which furthermore yielded rather incoherent results. How do these hypotheses and findings fit into current thinking and knowledge in the field of interpreting? The first finding regarding note quantity and target-text accuracy may seem very obvious at first glance, but it is in fact less trivial than it appears. For one thing, no empirical research has been conducted to date on the relation between note quantity and note efficiency in consecutive interpreting; for another, there is no agreement on this issue in the interpreting community (e.g. Gile 1995: 182). If anything, most instructors advocate a principle of economy in note-taking (cf. Ilg & Lambert 1996: 78) – a recommendation that is clearly in contradiction with the first hypothesis and the present findings. Furthermore, the recommended principle of economy in note-taking

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

finds theoretical support in various concepts and models of interpreting. One is the so-called MiniMax Principle, according to which interpreters (among others) prefer to use the least demanding strategy to achieve the best possible result (e.g. Massaro & Shlesinger 1997: 36, who suggest adapting Levý’s (1967) MiniMax Principle to the study of interpreting). Another very important source of theoretical support and explanation is the so-called Effort Models, proposed and developed by Daniel Gile (e.g. Gile 1995). According to the Effort Model of consecutive interpreting, a (too) large quantity of notes may result in poor-quality performance overall for the simple reason that too much of the interpreter’s (limited) capacity is vested in the note-taking component to the detriment of the other components of the task, most importantly the listening and memory components. Consequently, there are probably limits as to how far a possible recommendation regarding the quantity of notes should be taken. The second finding regarding note form is fairly uncontroversial due to the obvious efficiency of abbreviations as compared to full words (cf. for example Rozan 1956; van Hoof 1962; Mikkelson 1993; Andres 2001) – provided that the abbreviations used are sufficiently unambiguous, of course. Clearly, the time- and capacity-saving strategy of abbreviation is fully in line with the advocated principle of economy in note-taking – and the concepts and models that support and explain it. The plausibility of the third hypothesis will not be discussed here, as it found no support in the present analyses, which were furthermore characterised by incoherent results. The only relatively stable finding was the overall dominance of notes in the target language. To round off this paper, we should like to offer a possible explanation for this unexpected result. After we had conducted our pilot study and formulated the hypotheses, the present author carried out an additional study on the choice of language for note-taking (Dam 2004b), the results of which indicated that it is governed mainly by the status of the language in the interpreters’ language combination, i.e. whether it is an A- or a B-language, and much less by its status in the interpreting task, i.e. whether it functions as the source or the target language: the subjects simply seemed to prefer taking notes in their A-language and use their B only in exceptional cases. This result does in fact converge with the findings of the present study, where the target language coincides with the subjects’ A-language, and there is a clear target- or A-language dominance overall. Apart from the TL- or A-language dominance, the analyses of note language presented in this paper were only able to show that the relationship between the choice of language for note-taking and target-text accuracy seems to be much more complex than we first assumed. It clearly needs to be investigated much further before new hypotheses can be formulated, let alone conclusions be drawn. (For discussions of some possible causes and effects of the choice of language for note-taking, see also Dam 2004a; Dam 2004b; and Dam et al. 2005.) More testing is also required for the first two hypotheses. Even if the findings presented here are based on a much larger sample of data than the one which served as the basis for the generation of the three hypotheses in our pilot study, the sample explored

 Helle V. Dam

here is still produced by only five subjects with only one language combination, who interpreted only one speech in only one direction. The present study should therefore be seen as only a first step: it does chart out some possible Directions in terms of methodology, but it does not as yet eliminate our Doubts about what makes interpreters’ notes more, or less, efficient.

Notes 1. The second and third hypotheses have been slightly modified here for the sake of clarity in the present limited-space context. In terms of substance, however, the hypotheses remain unaltered. 2. The subjects also made overall assessments at text level, but these assessments will not be discussed here. Suffice it here to say that, generally, the overall ratings converged well with the paragraph ratings. 3. We may, however, add that we were not able to find any correlation between the proportion of symbols in the notes and target-text accuracy. In fact, the quantity of symbols was relatively stable in all the notes analysed, independent of the degree of target-text accuracy.

References Andres, Dörte. 2001. “Notation: gute Zeichen – schlechte Zeichen. Empirische Untersuchung zur (Un-)Möglichkeit von Notizen, dargestellt am Sprachenpaar Französisch-Deutsch”. In Dolmetschen. Beiträge aus Forschung, Lehre und Praxis, A. F. Kelletat (ed.), 243–265. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Dam, Helle V. 2004a. “Interpreters’ notes: on the choice of form and language”. In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies. Selected papers from the 2001 EST Conference in Copenhagen, G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær & D. Gile (eds), 251–261. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Dam, Helle V. 2004b. “Interpreters’ notes: on the choice of language”. Interpreting 6 (1): 3–17. Dam, Helle V. & Engberg, Jan. 2006. “Assessing accuracy in consecutive interpreting: a comparison of semantic network analyses and intuitive assessments”. In Text and Translation Theory and Methodology of Translation, C. Heine, K. Schubert & H. Gerzymisch-Arbogast (eds), 215–234. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Dam, Helle V., Engberg, Jan & Schjoldager, Anne. 2005. “Modelling semantic networks on source and target texts in consecutive interpreting: a contribution to the study of interpreters’ notes”. In Knowledge Systems and Translation, H. V. Dam, J. Engberg & H. GerzymischArbogast (eds), 227–254. Berlin: de Gruyter. Gile, Daniel. 1995. Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gile, Daniel. 1999. “Variability in the perception of fidelity in simultaneous interpretation”. Hermes 22: 51–79. van Hoof, Henri. 1962. Théorie et Pratique de l’Interprétation. München: Max Hueber.

What makes interpreters’ notes efficient? 

Ilg, Gérard & Lambert, Sylvie. 1996. “Teaching consecutive interpreting”. Interpreting 1 (1): 69–99. Levý, Jiri. 1967. “Translation as a decision process. In To Honor Roman Jakobson II, 1171–1182. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter. Massaro, Dominic W. & Shlesinger, Miriam.1997. “Information processing and a computational approach to the study of simultaneous interpretation”. Interpreting 2 (1–2): 13–53. Mikkelson, Holly. 1993. “Consecutive interpretation”. The Reflector 6: 5–9. Rozan, Jean-François. 1956. La prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Genève: Georg. Seleskovitch, Danica. 1975. Langage, Langue et Mémoire. Etude de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive. Paris: Minard Lettres Modernes. Thiéry, Christopher. 1981. “L’enseignement de la prise de notes en interprétation consécutive: Un faux problème?”. In L’Enseignement de la Traduction et de l’Interprétation. De la Théorie à la Pédagogie, J. Delisle (ed.), 99–112. Ottawa: Éditions de l’Université d’Ottawa.

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique Dolorès Sanchez Université de Grenade, Espagne The aim of this article is to illustrate the pertinence of the gender perspective – which understands the social relations between men and women as the product of a historical, cultural and social construction – in order to explore the phenomenon of reproduction of the patriarchal ideology through the translation of discursive products other than literature. Our approach intends to highlight the role played by so-called neutral discourses and their translation in the transmission of dominant gendered representations in Western culture. We will approach this phenomenon through a specific example of textual scientific discourse, that of public communication of science and from a model of analysis based on the proposals of Critical Discourse Analysis.

Keywords: analyse critique du discours, idéologie, genre, discours scientifique, vulgarisation

1. Introduction De nombreuses études traductologiques contemporaines ont incorporé la perspective de genre à leur réflexion. Cette approche, qui comprend les rapports sociaux de sexes comme étant le produit d’une construction historique, culturelle et sociale, a permis de mettre en évidence que la traduction est, elle aussi, un espace social et discursif qui participe de cette construction et qu’il est donc possible de l’interroger de ce point de vue. Ces travaux, qui constituent aujourd’hui un ensemble théorique et pratique important, portent principalement leur attention sur les phénomènes concernés par la traduction des œuvres littéraires. Nous pensons que cette approche est applicable à d’autres productions discursives et qu’elle permet d’explorer le rôle joué par le discours scientifique et sa traduction dans la construction genrée du social.

 Dolorès Sanchez

Nous appréhenderons ici cette question à travers l’examen d’un mini corpus discursif composé de textes sur la différence sexuelle publiés dans une des principales revues de vulgarisation scientifique en langue française – La Recherche (désormais LR) – et de leur traduction pour l’édition espagnole de cette même revue – Mundo científico (désormais MC).

2. Genre et traduction : une approche nouvelle L’incorporation de la catégorie analytique de genre par certains travaux traductologiques est le fruit de la condition interdisciplinaire qui caractérise notre discipline aujourd’hui et du tournant culturel qui l’amène à consacrer un intérêt particulier aux facteurs culturels et sociaux déterminant la traduction.

2.1

La catégorie analytique de genre et son incorporation par la traductologie

Joan Scott définit le genre à partir d’une relation fondamentale entre deux propositions : «le genre est un élément constitutif de rapports sociaux fondés sur des différences perçues entre les sexes, et le genre est une forme primaire de signifier des rapports de pouvoir» (Scott 1988 : 141). Cette définition inscrit l’idéologie au coeur même du processus qui fonde les rapports sociaux femmes/hommes. Dans une perspective de genre, c’est-à-dire dans une perspective qui interprète la différence entre les sexes comme une différence construite, le postulat selon lequel une évidence biologique expliquerait le statut social des unes et des autres doit donc être entendu non plus en termes d’explication, mais de stratégie justificatrice légitimant des rapports sociaux inégalitaires. Le genre permet donc d’explorer le dispositif historique, culturel et idéologique qui élève au rang de naturelles les catégories de ‘femme’ et d’‘homme’. S’il établie une distinction entre sexe biologique et sexe social, il interroge également le rapport entre les deux. S’il souligne l’aspect relationnel des définitions normatives de masculinité et de féminité, il insiste aussi sur le fait que l’élaboration des oppositions binaires traditionnelles homme/femme, masculinité/féminité, etc. se fait dans un schéma asymétrique et hiérarchique en faveur du premier pôle de l’opposition. Ce concept dont la transversalité a permis des développements fructueux dans de nombreuses disciplines, s’avère aussi utile pour comprendre comment le phénomène de la traduction est perméable au genre. L’inclusion du genre en traduction a donné lieu à des approches diverses et souvent contradictoires. Elles englobent une réflexion sur la dimension genrée des catégories traditionnelles de la traductologie et sur la traduction comme lieu d’interprétation, de reproduction, de résistance ou même de rupture face à la signification de concepts sociaux marqués par le genre (pour une révision de ces travaux, Simon 1996 et von Flotow 1997). L’ensemble est bien sûr en rapport avec deux questions qui préoccupent également les traductologues: l’idéologie et l’éthi-

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique 

que. Traduction et genre est donc une orientation confirmée en traductologie, remplie encore, toutefois, de zones d’ombre. Nous faisons fondamentalement deux constats. Le premier est que l’intégration du genre comme outil d’analyse en traductologie concerne essentiellement l’étude de la traduction dans le domaine de la littérature. Le deuxième est que la plupart des travaux s’inscrivent dans le courant différentialiste du féminisme théorique et correspondent à un abord centré sur un sujet et une identité féminine différentielle. Ils impliquent une compréhension du genre traduisant, suivant une formule de Mathieu (1989), un rapport analogique entre sexe biologique et sexe social qui met surtout l’accent sur l’élaboration que notre culture fait de la différence sexuelle, sans interroger la nature même du rapport entre le biologique et le social. Dans ce qui suit, nous tenterons d’apprécier l’utilité de la catégorie analytique de genre dans le champ sociodiscursif scientifique, à partir d’une conception du genre qui interprète sexe biologique et sexe social comme deux catégories distinctes mais se construisant mutuellement.

2.2

Genre et traduction : la question de la représentation

Quand nous franchissons le pas vers une reconsidération de l’opposition entre sexe social et sexe biologique et un questionnement de la nature même du rapport mutuel qu’ils entretiennent, nous cessons d’envisager le sexe comme un fait de nature pour le considérer lui-même comme un construit social. Dans cette nouvelle approche la dimension discursive de la construction du genre occupe une place primordiale (Butler 1990). La représentation du genre devient le lieu privilégié où cette construction se manifeste mais aussi où elle s’élabore et se performe. Dans cette compréhension du genre, la notion de représentation joue un rôle déterminant. C’est parce que les catégories du langage qui disent le genre sont proposées comme étant des catégories naturelles que le langage devient le vecteur de cette construction naturalisant les rapports sociaux de sexe. Elles contribuent au brouillage d’un fonctionnement sémantique qui organise la collusion et la confusion entre le biologique et le social. La notion de langage qui entre ici en jeu s’éloigne radicalement de la compréhension traditionnelle du phénomène langagier comme reflet de la réalité pour y substituer une analyse poststructuraliste du discours comme interprétation/construction de la réalité. Le langage ou, plutôt, les discours ne sont pas de fidèles reflets du réel ; au contraire, ils construisent, soutiennent et confortent une interprétation de la réalité. Ils construisent des représentations de la société, des pratiques sociales, des acteurs sociaux et des relations qui s’établissent entre eux. Les conceptions critiques de l’analyse du discours (voir, par exemple, Fairclough 1995) permettent d’appréhender les manifestations textuelles dans leur contexte et d’établir les liens entre les structures linguistiques et les contextes sociaux dans lesquels elles se produisent.

 Dolorès Sanchez

3. Discours littéraire vs discours scientifique Nous revenons sur cette distinction majeure de notre tradition académique, non plus, cette fois, pour justifier l’intérêt de notre travail mais pour en traquer les fonctionnements et en défaire certains présupposés. Cette tradition établit une opposition forte entre, d’une part, des textes qui seraient imprégnés d’idéologie et, d’autre part, des textes supposés idéologiquement neutres. C’est en ce sens que le texte littéraire est considéré comme un terrain particulièrement propice à l’analyse de l’idéologie ou de la subjectivité de son auteur et qu’il est devenu un espace discursif particulièrement intéressant du point de vue d’une analyse de genre. Le texte scientifique, quant à lui, apparaît comme le texte neutre et transparent par excellence, auquel on ne pourrait appliquer les outils de l’analyse et de la critique discursive. Dans le discours scientifique, pour reprendre les mots de Foucault (1971 : 55) “le monde [tournerait] vers nous un visage lisible que nous n’aurions plus qu’à déchiffrer”. Comme l’ont montré des auteurs comme Chalmers (1982), en général la communauté scientifique ne se soucie guère de la question de la représentation puisque, assumant l’idée de la transparence du langage, elle part du principe que son discours représente la réalité et que si les représentations évoluent, c’est uniquement en vertu des progrès de la science et non en raison d’une modification des représentations. Cette opposition entre texte transparent et texte opaque est également visible en traductologie où, en ce qui concerne la traduction de textes scientifiques, les travaux sont plutôt de type prescriptif (voir par ex. Bédard 1986 et Maillot 1981), assumant (et reconduisant) ce présupposé qui fait du texte scientifique un texte idéologiquement neutre. Pourtant, la science est une activité sociale et culturelle qui ne peut être envisagée indépendamment du lieu, du temps et des acteurs impliqués dans la production du savoir. Nous pensons, avec les analystes critiques du discours, que, comme tout autre, le discours scientifique est une pratique sociale imbriquée dans d’autres pratiques sociales et déterminée par le contexte institutionnel qui le produit sous l’effet de règles de ségrégation et de légitimation discursives qui régissent le fonctionnement de la communauté scientifique (Bazerman 1988, Kress 1989). Dès lors, le texte scientifique apparaît comme un lieu privilégié pour observer le fonctionnement idéologique du discours, précisément parce que l’idéologie y avance cachée par la neutralité supposée de son langage. Et parce que l’autorité et le prestige social de la science qui l’institue comme un discours de la vérité en fait un discours de référence pour d’autres discours sociaux.

4. La traduction du genre dans/par la vulgarisation scientifique Nous illustrerons notre propos à travers l’étude d’un mini corpus composé de quatre articles originaux publiés par la revue de vulgarisation scientifique en langue française LR et de leur traduction dans l’édition espagnole de cette revue, MC (voir Sources Pri-

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique 

maires dans les Références). Notre travail peut être considéré comme une étude de cas mais se veut également une première approche servant à identifier un certain nombre de problématiques textuelles pouvant faire l’objet d’une étude systématisée sur un corpus textuel plus large. Le fonctionnement éditorial de ces deux revue est le suivant: MC reproduit deux mois après leur parution dans l’édition de LR une sélection des articles publiés par l’édition française (les quatre articles, objet de notre étude, correspondent à cette sélection). MC complète souvent ce choix en ajoutant un ou plusieurs articles d’expert-es du monde hispanique sur la même thématique que les articles traduits. Ce n’est pas le cas pour les numéros choisis ici mais ce fonctionnement nous permet d’envisager une étude basée sur un corpus comparable constitué de textes en langue source (français), de leur traduction en langue cible (espagnol) et de textes originaux dans la langue cible, puisés dans l’ensemble de la collection de MC à la même époque. Ce type de corpus nous permettrait d’explorer, comme le conseille Mona Baker (1995), les ressemblances et les divergences entre structures linguistiques de textes produits sous la pression de la traduction et celles de textes produits dans une liberté relative, reproduisant les structures discursives propres au type textuel, au domaine ou à la discipline. Ces deux revues publient mensuellement des articles signés parfois par des journalistes mais le plus souvent – et c’est le cas ici – par des auteur-es du monde universitaire ou de la recherche sur des sujets divers intéressant la recherche scientifique actuelle et fréquemment en rapport direct avec des sujets d’actualité sociale : génome, cancer, sida, changement climatique, etc. Ces dernières années elles ont publié ponctuellement des articles sur le thème de la différence sexuelle, mais c’est dans le cadre d’une publication hors série que LR publie en novembre 2001 un monographique de vingt-quatre articles. Suivant son habitude, quelques mois plus tard MC intègre dans le numéro 234 de l’année 2002 un dossier – qui sélectionne et reproduit via la traduction quatre des articles du hors série de LR. Les huit articles qui constituent notre mini corpus correspondent donc à la sélection des quatre textes que fait MC parmi les vingtquatre articles publiés initialement par LR. Leurs auteur-es appartiennent à trois disciplines ou sous-disciplines scientifiques différentes (biologie, anthropologie biologique, histoire des sciences) et les textes portent sur les processus et les facteurs biologiques induisant la détermination sexuelle ou sur l’identification, à posteriori, des signes morphologiques de la différence sexuelle.

4.1

Production et diffusion du discours et contextes sociaux de réception

Pour mesurer l’utilité sociale de ce discours sur la différence sexuelle, nous tracerons brièvement les aspects contextuels qui permettent d’appréhender le discours dans sa dimension d’interaction sociale. Comme l’explique van Dijk (1997), la confrontation entre la situation contextuelle et le discours est une condition sine qua non pour comprendre le discours comme résultat d’évènements sociaux et/ou discursifs qui ont eu une incidence sur lui. Mais c’est également la condition pour le comprendre comme action, c’est-à-dire apte à avoir des effets sur le social.

 Dolorès Sanchez

4.1.1 La pratique sociodiscursive de la vulgarisation scientifique La vulgarisation scientifique est une pratique sociodiscursive visant à communiquer une version simplifiée du savoir scientifique à des non initiés. Selon Jacobi (1987 : 43–47), il s’agit d’un discours qui se construit dans l’intertexte où le scientifique, le didactique et le vulgarisé se superposent. Pour ce qui est de notre corpus, cette réélaboration discursive simplificatrice n’est pas le fait d’agents étrangers à la production de textes primaires comme c’est parfois le cas quand des journalistes spécialisés produisent des synthèses de recherches. Ici, ce sont les expert-es mêmes qui réélaborent leur propre discours en tenant compte, supposons-nous, du lectorat profane auquel il est destiné. On pourrait penser que la réélaboration discursive propre à la vulgarisation qui simplifie et généralise, pour ainsi dire, le discours pourrait entraîner son idéologisation. D’autre part, le fait que certains des articles soumis à l’analyse ne s’inscrivent pas dans des disciplines appartenant aux sciences dites “dures” et relèvent d’une approche plus culturelle de la science pourrait rendre leur discours plus perméable à l’idéologie. Ces questions dont nous ne pouvons débattre ici, nous les abordons à partir de certaines approches des études sociales de la science, comme par exemple les travaux de Latour (1995), qui minent la dichotomie entre science et société, ou vérité et idéologie. Nous partons, en premier lieu, de l’idée d’une continuité discursive entre textes primaires, produits au sein des institutions scientifiques et rendant compte de la communication entre experts, et textes secondaires, qui socialisent les savoirs dans la communication experts-non experts. En second lieu, nous assumons qu’aucune des sciences naturelles et des sciences humaines n’a le privilège d’un savoir pur, non contaminé par l’ordre social et culturel dont elles sont le produit. Les revues qui servent de support au discours étudié ici sont considérées comme des revues haut de gamme de la vulgarisation, du point de vue de leur prestige social et de la scientificité dont elles se portent garantes. Leur lectorat est composé principalement d’enseignant-es ou d’étudiant-es ou de personnes assumant un rôle d’expert au sein de certains groupes sociaux (Jacobi 1987). Contrairement à d’autres publications, il s’agit donc de destinataires non experts mais relativement disposés à une lecture parfois difficile. Jacobi (1987 : 52–55) a mis, d’autre part, en évidence que la consommation de ce type de revues n’est pas d’un caractère éphémère mais que son lectorat tend à s’approprier l’information reçue pour la recycler dans ses activités sociales et/ou professionnelles. Si nous assumons cette idée d’un réseau social de diffusion de la science entraînant une interaction sociale à grande échelle, nous concevons l’analyse de ce type de discours en rapport avec l’analyse du pouvoir des représentations, en particulier celles du genre, que le discours scientifique est capable de promouvoir dans le corps social dans son entier. Dans le rapport asymétrique des interlocuteurs (experts/non experts) face aux connaissances vulgarisées, l’autorité et la légitimité sociale dont jouit la science dans nos sociétés se reportent sur le discours de la vulgarisation permettant ainsi de disséminer dans le corps social dans son entier des modèles de représentation marqués du sceau de la vérité.

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique 

4.1.2 La différence sexuelle : les contextes sociaux d’une discussion Nous nous limiterons ici à une analyse sommaire, non exhaustive et réduite aux contextes français et espagnol (LR est diffusée dans d’autre pays francophones européens, américains ou africains et MC en Amérique Latine). En Espagne et en France, comme dans d’autres sociétés contemporaines, la perception du genre a changé. Les années soixante-dix constituent un tournant majeur dans ce changement sous la pression féministe qui remet en question l’organisation sociale – et en particulier la division sociosexuelle du travail – et le lieu commun selon lequel la fonction sociale des femmes serait le résultat inéluctable de leur destin biologique. Pour des raisons historiques (lutte antifranquiste en Espagne et radicalisme politique des années soixante-dix en France), cette pression s’élabore et se manifeste différemment dans chacun des contextes, sans exclure néanmoins des lignes de coïncidence dans les questions débattues (revendication d’un égalitarisme social de droit et de fait ; participation et investissement de lieux de pouvoir structurel, en particulier le politique). Au coeur des débats sur ce que les femmes peuvent faire et que, de fait, elles font déjà, on détecte toujours la question de l’opposition culture/nature qui a traversé nombre de débats contemporains et qui est visible au sein même des discours féministes (Mathieu 1989). Récemment, cette question a été stimulée par d’autres débats sociaux provoqués par la visibilité conquise de pratiques sociales dissidentes du modèle patriarcal (homosexualité, lesbianisme, transsexualisme, etc.) et l’émergence de revendications concrètes de certains collectifs (droit au mariage ou à l’adoption de couples homosexuels, reconnaissance légale du transsexualisme, etc.). Dans ce contexte de crise des modèles traditionnels des identités sociales de sexe et/ou de genre, nous pouvons interpréter le discours de la vulgarisation scientifique sur la différence sexuelle comme une intervention ex-cathedra dans le débat social. Nous verrons, cependant, que par la traduction, MC réoriente l’interprétation du discours dans une direction qui diverge de celle proposée par LR. 4.1.3

Le rapport sexe/genre et sa traduction

4.1.3.1 Les titres de couverture La couverture du numéro hors série de LR est intégralement conçue autour du titre monographique «Sexes. Comment on devient homme ou femme». Celle du numéro de MC annonce comme dossier principal le thème «Sexos. Verdades y mentiras bajo el prisma de la ciencia: homosexualidad, hermafroditismo, dimorfismo sexual» [Sexes. Vérités et mensonges sous le prisme de la science : homosexualité, hermaphroditisme et dimorphisme sexuel] et rejette sur une étroite marge gauche d’autres contenus du sommaire. La comparaison des deux couvertures montre une différence fondamentale dans l’approche du sujet. Dans LR le titre est une référence claire à la formule beauvoirienne «on ne naît pas femme on le devient». En effet, cet aphorisme du Deuxième sexe de Simone de Beauvoir qui fut transformé en slogan politique par les féministes des années soixante-dix est, aujourd’hui encore, amplement utilisé pour récuser l’essentialisme des affirmations patriarcales. Cette allusion n’est donc pas fortuite, et la référence

 Dolorès Sanchez

à un devenir homme ou femme suggère que le contenu du numéro intègrera la dimension construite du genre. D’autre part, ce qui est affirmé, d’entrée, avec le titre c’est une approche basée sur la bipolarité homme/femme comme concepts différents, opposés et exclusifs l’un de l’autre. Le titre du numéro de MC fait référence, au contraire, à l’autorité de la science pour dicter ce qui est vrai face aux idées fausses communément admises. A l’opposé de LR, la couverture de MC présente la bipolarité sexuelle (Dimorfismo sexual) comme une question parmi d’autres de la différence sexuelle. Celle-ci est par ailleurs exposée en termes biomédicaux et non plus du point de vue d’un devenir conçu comme social. Dans la série “ homosexualidad, hermafroditismo, dimorfismo sexual”, la cohabitation du concept d’homosexualité avec ceux d’hermaphroditisme et de dimorphisme sexuel rend compte d’une conceptualisation biologiste de l’homosexualité et confirme l’approche du sujet d’un point de vue biomédical.

4.1.3.2 L’analyse microdiscursive des textes Nous présentons ici deux des aspects observés dans l’analyse de la texture discursive d’un point de vue lexical. Dans notre analyse globale du discours, nous avons cherché à repérer les opérations de marquage lexical qui servent à représenter la différence sexuelle à travers l’utilisation de certaines catégories comme, entre autres, ‘homme’, ‘femme’, ‘mâle’, ‘femelle’, ‘féminin’ ou ‘masculin’ et leur traduction. Le repérage, le suivi et l’analyse du déploiement isotopique de ces catégories a pour but de mettre en évidence comment elles sont inscrites dans le discours en tant que catégories sociales et/ ou biologiques et le type de représentation sémantique qui émane de la topographie discursive mise en place (Tomlin et al. 1997). Nous ne cherchons pas à démontrer la véracité ou l’inexactitude des affirmations du discours ni la justesse de la traduction mais à mesurer l’impact de la représentation qui est donnée et sa fonction sociale dans un contexte précis. Nous suivons en cela les termes foucaldiens de la proposition de Judith Butler quant à la portée d’une analyse de genre : A genealogical critique refuses to search for the origins of gender, the inner truth of female desire, a genuine or authentic sexual identity that repression has kept from view; rather, genealogy investigates the political stakes in designating as an origin and cause those identity categories that are in fact the effects of institution, practices, discourses with multiple and diffuse points of origin... (Butler 1990 : 11)

Pour comprendre notre analyse, il est important de savoir que les données scientifiques actuellement disponibles sont susceptibles de soutenir au moins deux modèles : le premier, dominant, établit une différenciation radicale entre deux sexes ; le deuxième décrit un seul sexe dans un continuum biologique dans lequel il est difficile d’établir des différences marquées (sur cette question voir, par exemple, Kraus 2000). Première observation. L’analyse détaillée des textes montre que, dans les segments textuels portant sur ce que la biologie nomme différentiation secondaire (sexe morpho-

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique 

logique), c’est-à-dire la surface visible du corps, l’anatomie humaine est décrite en termes de ‘féminin’ ou ‘masculin’. Nous en donnons ici un exemple choisi parmi d’autres : (1a) Fr. L’enfant naît avec des caractères anatomiques à la fois masculins et féminins ou avec des organes génitaux non conformes à son sexe génétique (LR : 58) Or les notions de masculin et de féminin n’ont de sens qu’à l’intérieur du système culturel qui les fait advenir. Si elles sont censées traduire avant tout les caractéristiques psychologiques et comportementales des hommes et des femmes, appliquées ici à la description physique des corps, elles transportent avec elles ce poids de l’évidence acquise de ce qui est féminin ou masculin dans notre culture et font adhérer au corps quelque chose qui est de l’ordre du genre et non pas du sexe. Dans le choix discursif de catégories comme ‘féminin’ ou ‘masculin’ hypostasiant l’emploi de ‘femelle’ ou ‘mâle’, il y a déjà une opération idéologique qui féminise ou masculinise le corps. On peut dire qu’elles prescrivent le genre, en faisant omission du fait que le corps est le résultat d’une série d’interventions et d’impératifs sociaux et culturels qui le fabriquent comme corps sexué, féminin ou masculin (sur la question du corps construit voir, par exemple, Guillaumin 1992). Le processus de différentiation, c’est-à-dire la féminisation ou la masculinisation, est remplacé par une marque de la différence sexuelle. Le genre est représenté sur le corps lui-même : la différence se substitue à la différentiation. La traduction de ces segments du français vers l’espagnol est, dans tous les cas, littérale. Nous reproduisons la traduction de l’exemple que nous avons utilisé ci-dessus : (1b) Esp. El niño nace con características anatómicas a la vez masculinas y femeninas, o con unos órganos genitales que no concuerdan con su sexo genético. (MC: 50) Le discours traduit reconduit donc cette stratégie discursive en espagnol produisant une représentation de l’anatomie humaine qui est imprégnée de genre. Deuxième observation. Parallèlement à la stratégie décrite ci-dessus, une autre tendance différencie les traductions de MC des originaux de LR et renforce, dans le discours en espagnol, la naturalisation du genre. Dans les segments textuels décrivant ce que la biologie nomme différentiation primaire (sexe génétique), c’est-à-dire la biologie du corps dans son observation microscopique, les textes de LR tendent à l’utilisation abondante de catégories descriptives comme ‘femelle’, ‘mâle’ ou ‘de la femelle’, ‘du mâle’. Ces expressions renvoient à une animalité du corps humain. La biologie humaine est décritre selon un ordre zoologique sur lequel, pourrait-on penser, le culturel viendrait ensuite se superposer (pour une analyse des traits sémantiques/humain/animal en linguistique voir Michard, 2002). Dans MC, ces expressions sont systématiquement traduites par des catégories lexicales (du type femenino, masculino) relevant de l’humain et du culturel. Elles sont donc ici encore prescriptives du point de vue du genre dans la mesure où elles associent féminité ou masculinité, qui sont des valeurs culturelles, à la matière même des corps ou aux processus biologiques. Nous en donnons deux exemples, choisis parmi d’autres :

 Dolorès Sanchez

(2) Fr. (...) sélectionner les embryons mâles ou femelles juste avant de les implanter… ” (LR : 82) Esp. (...) seleccionar los embriones masculinos o femeninos justo antes de implantarlos… (LR: 63)

(3) Fr. Dans la méiose femelle, les deux chromosomes X, parfaitement identiques, font de même. En revanche, dans la méiose mâle, les chromosomes X et Y … (LR: 10–11) Esp. En la meiosis femenina, los dos cromosomas X, perfectamente idénticos, hacen otro tanto. En cambio, en la meiosis masculina, los cromosomas X e Y… (MC: 46)

Nous pouvons reconduire l’analyse faite à propos de notre première observation mais, ici, seulement pour le discours en espagnol. En effet, alors que les descriptions du discours en français renvoient au sexe, celles du discours en espagnol renvoient au genre (pour une analyse plus détaillée, voir Sanchez sous presse). Globalement donc, les choix discursifs de MC renforcent par leur réitération une représentation déterministe du corps. Par ailleurs, associées au jargon scientifique qui décrit l’infiniment petit de l’organisme humain (embrión) ou les processus biologiques (meiosis), les catégories lexicales utilisées en espagnol inscrivent au cœur de la matière corporelle la marque de genre. C’est, pour ainsi dire, la matière même qui est féminisée ou masculinisée. Cette stratégie se superposant à la première, il apparaît que les traductions renforcent par rapport aux originaux, cette idée selon laquelle les différences de genre renvoient en ultime instance à quelque chose qui est de l’ordre du biologique, une espèce de programmation inéluctable donc.

5. Conclusion La représentation globale tissée par le discours est le résultat de l’accumulation et de la superposition de l’ensemble des stratégies mises en place par le dispositif discursif et dont nous n’avons évoqué ici qu’un certain nombre d’éléments. Les observations faites sur la microstructure textuelle semblent pouvoir être alignées sur la façon dont chacun des discours est initialement présenté (couvertures) et qui oriente les deux audiences vers une lecture/interprétation différente, une lecture beaucoup plus déterministe dans le discours traduit parce qu’il prête au corps des traits inhérents de genre. Pour MC, nous serions dans un dispositif discursif où le genre construit le sexe : il le construit de façon binaire et assujetti à l’opposition féminin/masculin. Nous n’avons pas abordé ici la question de la responsabilité des différents agents intervenant dans le processus d’édition (et de traduction) du discours. Il nous semble toutefois que la réélaboration discursive observée dans MC est à mettre en rapport avec un positionnement idéologique qui diverge du positionnement du discours initial et qui indique une tension majeure entre texte et contexte. Un contexte qui, s’il a culminé en Espagne par l’adop-

Traduction, genre et discours scientifique 

tion en 2005 d’une législation favorable au mariage entre personnes du même sexe, a été (et est encore) marqué par une confrontation sociale et discursive, autour de certaines pratiques sociales émergentes qui défient la configuration traditionnelle de la différence sexuelle et des rôle sociaux que cette différence présuppose.

Références Sources Primaires Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 2001. “La fin programmée du dimorphisme sexuel”. La Recherche Horssérie nº6 : 58–62. Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 2002. “El final programado del dimorfismo sexual”. Mundo Científico 234 : 50–55. Fisher, Jean-Louis. 2001. “Garçon ou fille : mode d’emploi”. La Recherche Hors-série nº6 : 80–85. Fisher, Jean-Louis. 2002. “Niño o niña, modo de empleo”. Mundo Científico 234 : 60–63. Peyre, Evelyne. 2001. “Une mémoire enfouie dans l’os”. La Recherche Hors-série nº6 : 41–43. Peyre, Evelyne. 2002. “Memoria encerrada en los huesos”. Mundo Científico 234: 56–59. Quintana Murci, Lluís, et Leonardo, Pascal. 2001. “X et Y : anatomie d’un couple étrange”. La Recherche Hors-série nº6 : 10–13. Quintana Murci, Lluís et Leonardi, Pascal. 2002. “X e Y: historia de una extraña pareja”. Mundo Científico 234: 46–49.

Sources secondaires Baker, Mona. 1995. “Corpora in translation studies: an Overview and Some Suggestions for Future Research”. Target 7 (2): 223–243. Bazerman, Charles. 1988. “Scientific writing as a social practice”. In Shaping written knowledge. The genre and activity of the experimental article in science, C. Bazerman (éd.), 289–332. The University of Wisconsin Press. Bédard, Claude. 1986. La traduction technique. Principes et pratique. Montréal: Linguatech. Butler, Judith P. 1990. Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Londres: Routledge. Chalmers, Alan F. 1982. What is this thing called Science? Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Londres: Routledge. Foucault, Michel. 1971. L’ordre du discours. Paris: Gallimard. Guillaumin, Colette. 1992. “Le corps construit”. In Sexe, race et pratique du pouvoir. C. Guillaumin (éd.), 117–142. Paris: Côté-femme. Jacobi, Daniel. 1987. Textes et images de la vulgarisation scientifique. Berne: Peter Lang. Kraus, Cynthia. 2000. “La bicatégorisation par sexe à l’épreuve de la science”. In L’invention du naturel. Les sciences et la fabrication du féminin et du masculin, D. Gardey et I. Löwy (dir.), 187–213. Paris: Editions des archives contemporaines. Kress, Gunther. 1989. Linguistic Processes in Sociocultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Latour, Bruno. 1995. La science en action. Paris: Gallimard. Maillot, Jean. La traduction scientifique et technique. Paris : Technique et documentation.

 Dolorès Sanchez Mathieu, Nicole-Claude. 1989. “Identité sexuelle/sexuée/de sexe ? Trois modes de conceptualisation du rapport entre sexe et genre”. In Catégorisation de sexe et constructions scientifiques, A.-M. Daune-Richard, M.-C. Hurtig et M.-F. Pichevin (eds), 109–141. Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence. Michard, Claire. 2002. Sexe en linguistique. Sémantique ou zoologie. Paris: L’harmattan. Sánchez Dolores. Sous presse. “El cuerpo traducido: globalización de prácticas discursivas y reelaboración cultural del género”. In Cuerpo de Mujer: miradas, Representaciones e Identidades, A. Sánchez Espinosa et al. (eds). Granada: Universidad de Granada. Scott, Joan. 1988. “Le genre: une catégorie utile d’analyse historique”. Les Cahiers du GRIF 37/38: 125–154. Simon, Sherry. 1996. Gender in Translation. Cultural identity and the politics of transmission. Londres: Routledge. Tomlin, Russel S. et al. 1997. “Discourse Semantics”. In Discourse as Structure and Process. Discourse Studies: a Multidisciplinary Introduction. II, T. A. van Dijk (éd.), 63–111. Londres: Sage. van Dijk, Teun A. 1997. “Discourse as Social Interaction”. In Discourse as Social Interaction. Discourse Studies: a multidisciplinary Introduction. I, T. A. van Dijk (éd.), 1–37. Londres: Sage. von Flotow, Luise. 1997. Translation and Gender. Translating in the ‘Era of Feminism’. Manchester: St. Jerome.

part 4

Linguistics-based

Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation from English into Finnish Tiina Puurtinen University of Joensuu, Finland

The article compares the frequencies, functions and effects of evaluative premodified noun phrases (NPs) in English and Finnish newspaper and magazine texts and discusses the relevance of potential differences to translation. In addition to neutral specifications, premodifiers in NPs often express clearly subjective evaluations, which are thus presented as presupposed and generally accepted facts. This manipulative strategy is one example of the linguistic realisation of ideology, i.e. the explicit and implicit ways in which values, beliefs and attitudes are reflected in language use (van Dijk 1993, Fairclough 1990, 1995a, 1995b, Fowler 1991). The findings suggest that, first, Finnish NPs often have a causal or concessive function; second, the frequency of strong evaluative NPs is higher in English texts; and third, both English and Finnish tend to use premodifications for negative rather than positive evaluations. These differences might give rise to modification of NPs in translation.

Keywords: evaluation, ideology, noun phrase, premodifier

1. Introduction This article compares the use of evaluative premodified noun phrases (NPs; referred to as nominal groups in Halliday 1994) in English and Finnish newspaper and magazine texts (articles, editorials, columns) and discusses the relevance of potential differences to translation. The focus is mainly on NPs in which the writer’s subjective opinion of a person, group or action is expressed by a premodifier; evaluative head words are also briefly discussed, whereas postmodifiers, such as relative clauses, are disregarded. Unavoidably, drawing a line between “objective” facts and “subjective” opinions always involves a degree of subjectivity and interpretation, as every text is written from a par-

 Tiina Puurtinen

ticular point of view and thus any expression could be considered to some extent subjective. In the following, nevertheless, an attempt is made to exclude objectively verifiable facts and to concentrate on such opinions and characterisations which might give rise to disagreement. I will begin by describing the NP structures under investigation and by presenting a few central concepts of critical discourse analysis before illustrating the functions and effects of NPs found in the research material. Finally, I will briefly discuss the significance of the findings to translators and implications for further research based on English–Finnish translations.

2. Evaluative noun phrases and ideology Premodified NPs usually include information that is supposed to be known by the reader and therefore need not be explicated by longer explanations. Premodifiers can form a neutral specification of the head word and express, for instance, in which capacity or role a person is discussed in the text; a premodifier can be used as a subtle, polite reminder of a person’s identity and status (e.g. the former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing). Often premodified NPs express more or less subjective evaluations, which are thus presented as taken-for-granted, generally accepted facts, and the reader is not encouraged to oppose or reject them (e.g. the insufferably arrogant former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, Newsweek 25.11. 2002, p. 15). The evaluative constituent is the epithet (Halliday 1994: 184–186) of the NP; sometimes, however, even the choice of a particular title can indicate subjectivity (see Example 4 below). Such linguistic formulations can be a deliberate strategy used in texts which are intended to influence readers’ opinions (such as editorials, propaganda). Subjective evaluations presented as full clauses are more likely to encourage readers to object. Moreover, clause form makes it necessary for the writer to consider alternative degrees of modality (probability, likelihood, necessity). If the previous authentic example were reformulated by using a relative clause (see Example 1 below), it would be more open for readers’ critical evaluation and denial (“No, he is not insufferably arrogant!”), and the writer might decide to add a marker of modality, such as a hedge (who seems to be/who may be considered insufferably arrogant).

(1) … the insufferably arrogant former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing (Newsweek 25.11. 2002, 15) vs. Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, who is the former French president and also insufferably arrogant. (my formulation) Such opinions can thus be presented as presupposed information, i.e. as readers’ background knowledge. Presuppositions can be used as an intentional means of manipulation, which masks an opinion that readers are expected to accept as “old information”, something they already know (Fairclough 1990: 152–155; see also Leech 1990: 277–300, Levin-

Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation 

son 1984: 167–225). Naturally translation problems are often caused even by “innocent”, non-manipulative presuppositions if there are significant differences in the background knowledge of the source text (ST) and target text (TT) readers (Fawcett 1998). Intentional and unintentional manipulation of opinions is related to the extensive concept of ideology reflected in language use, i.e. the various explicit and implicit ways in which attitudes, beliefs and values shared by a particular group or society are linguistically realised (see e.g. van Dijk 1993, Fairclough 1990, 1995a, 1995b, Fowler 1991, Heikkinen 1999, Karvonen 1995, Simpson 1993; on relations and differences between opinions, attitudes, beliefs and values, see van Dijk 1996; and on ideology and translation, see Hatim 1997, Hatim & Mason 1997: 143–163 and Puurtinen 2000, forthcoming). On the one hand, taken-for-granted, unquestioned attitudes are often unconsciously reflected in linguistic choices; on the other hand, language is also used consciously as a tool of manipulation. The concept of ideology seems to be so vague and slippery as to evade exact definition (for criticism of the concept, see Solin 1995). Van Dijk (1996), however, gives a helpful account of the interrelations between ideologies, values, beliefs, opinions and attitudes, and describes ideologies as “the basic frameworks of social cognition” which organise and monitor evaluative beliefs, i.e. attitudes, shared by social groups. Here ideology is used as a convenient umbrella term for a set of attitudes. Opinions on the explicitness of ideologies in texts vary: Fairclough (1995b: 14) claims that ideologies are implicit arguments which help set up and maintain power relations (see also Thompson 1990: 8–9), whereas Heikkinen (1999: 100–101) argues that ideologies can also be explicitly stated. Implicit meanings, such as presuppositions, however, are likely to be more effective and insidious precisely because of their invisibility and the unlikelihood of their triggering objections. Explicit and implicit meanings are not clearly definable either. Rather than distinct categories, they should be seen as a continuum between extremely explicit and extremely implicit; editorials, for instance, use both open, explicit ways, or strategies, and subtle, implicit, manipulative ways of influencing readers (Heikkinen 1999: 224–225). The choice of an explicit or implicit strategy depends on text type and sociocultural conventions: the writer of an editorial, for example, knows that the text is an opinion text which may express the writer’s/newspaper’s views, even openly, and the reader, in turn, knows that the editorial is to be interpreted as subjective rather than “neutral”, with a primarily persuasive function. Nevertheless, this knowledge does not necessarily open the reader’s eyes to the most implicit means of manipulation. Moreover, conventions of argumentation and the degree of evaluativeness considered appropriate are highly culture-specific, even in a seemingly identical text type (Hatim 1997). Implicitness and taken-for-grantedness of meanings (or “common sense”, Fairclough 1990: 77–108) and linguistic expressions result from naturalisation, which means that particular linguistic formulations, such as word choices and clause structures, become natural and conventional in certain contexts and thus simultaneously ideological meanings become taken-for-granted (Fairclough 1990: 91–108, Heikkinen 1999: 89–94, Kar-

 Tiina Puurtinen

vonen 1995: 207, 216–219). Politicians and journalists may deliberately aim to naturalise certain expressions, making the meanings conveyed by them unquestioned and generally accepted (e.g. President Bush’s expression “axis of evil”). The examples presented below may not include such naturalised expressions; however, the fact that an evaluation is expressed by a premodified NP as if it were given, shared knowledge can reveal an aim at naturalisation. Premodified NPs can have various positions in the thematic structure or information structure of a clause. Theme, which is located at the beginning of a clause, usually includes old, known information and rheme presents new information. Thus, the clearest case of masking a subjective opinion is locating an evaluative NP in theme position. Evaluative NPs are interesting from the point of view of all three textual metafunctions (Halliday 1994): the ideational function is related to the actual information content, the interpersonal function refers to the relationship between the writer and reader (e.g. intention to influence opinions) and the writer’s attitude to the subject matter, and the textual function is realised as the structure of the text, including thematic and information structure.

3. Research material and method The research material consisted of editorials, columns and articles published in a number of English and Finnish newspapers and magazines between June and October 2003. Text selection was not completely random: only texts with at least some evaluative NPs were included. The main topic of the texts was either a particular person (in most cases a president or prime minister), a government or the EU, i.e. such topics seem to give rise to evaluations of the type under investigation. The number of Finnish texts was 20, the number of English texts 23 (see Table 1). The Finnish and English materials were quite different in terms of text length, which reflects the different distribution of text types; the Finnish texts were mostly short editorials (15/20), whereas the English texts were mostly long articles (16/23). This in itself might indicate differences in text type conventions: in Finnish, evaluative NPs may be specific to argumentative texts, whereas in English they seem to be used extensively even in “neutral” articles. The selection criteria unfortunately yielded research material whose comparability and representativeness could be questioned because of the greater weight given to editorials in the Finnish material and articles in the English material. All premodified NPs which included a subjective evaluation were collected from the material and categorised according to function and degree of subjectivity. The overlapping categories are not even intended to be discrete but to illustrate the variety of NPs. In some cases, the context offered background information and arguments to support the evaluation, which was then not presented as a perfectly self-evident fact.

Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation 

Table 1. Quantitative information on research material.

n of texts length (words) mean length total of finite clauses mean of finite clauses

Finnish (Helsingin Sanomat, Suomen Kuvalehti)

English (Newsweek, The Economist, New Statesman, Nation)

20 180–1230 358 949 47.5

23 460–2200 981 2089 90.8

4. Functions of evaluative noun phrases The following, partly overlapping categories show, with the help of examples, what kind of functions evaluative NPs have in the research material. The categorisation is not exhaustive, and the assessment of the subjectivity and effect of the examples is a matter of interpretation.

4.1

Cause

An NP may correspond to a subordinate clause expressing cause, as in Example 2. NPs of this type were very frequent in Finnish texts. (2) Puheenjohtajamaalla ei poikkeuksellisen haastavan kauden alkumetreillä ole varaa rikkoa välejään mahtimaa Saksaan… (Helsingin Sanomat 4.7. 2003, A4) [‘The [Italian] presidency cannot at the beginning of an exceptionally challenging term afford to break off relations with superpower Germany…’] (because the term is challenging, Italy cannot afford to…)

4.2

Concession

Concessive NPs were also frequent in Finnish texts. In Example 3, the premodified NP is in theme position, i.e. supposed to be shared knowledge, although Arafat’s “ostensible retirement” is not supported by the preceding text and is thus presented as a generally accepted fact. (3) Näennäisesti sivuun vetäytynyt Arafat ei todellisuudessa luovuttanut hänelle ohjia. (Helsingin Sanomat 6.9. 2003, A4) [‘Ostensibly retired Arafat did not really hand over the reins to him [Abbas]’] (although Arafat had ostensibly retired…)

 Tiina Puurtinen

4.3

Identification

In Finnish news texts, people are usually introduced by giving a title or profession as a premodifier (Karhu 1997: 79–80). Introductions can also include evaluative elements. Choosing a particular title among several alternatives can sometimes be a sign of subjective evaluation. In Example 4, Arnold Schwarzenegger is discussed in connection with California’s election for governor, but presenting him as “former Mr Universum” and “star actor” seems to place him in a category of his own, not to be taken as seriously as the other candidates (for premodifiers as a means of classification, see Fowler & Kress 1979). (4) Republikaaniseksi haastajaksi ilmoittautui entinen moninkertainen Mr. Universum ja Terminator-elokuvien maailmankuulu tähtinäyttelijä Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Helsingin Sanomat 22.8. 2003, A4) [‘As the Republican challenger came forward the former many-time Mr Universum and the Terminator films’ world-famous star actor Arnold Schwarzenegger’]

The premodifier does not always refer to an official position but can characterise the head word from a different perspective, as does the apposition in Example 5.

(5) The conference, which Mr Blair’s old chum, Bill Clinton, will kick off on July 11th at Guildhall in London… (The Economist 12.7.2003, 36)

4.4

Subtle subjective evaluation

In comparison with very strong and colourful evaluations, some premodified NPs seem almost neutral specifications, albeit often with a subtle subjective colouring. Although the use of the premodifying noun mishmash is immediately explained with a postmodifier in Example 6, this particular word gives the NP a negative tone.

(6) As president, Fox assembled a mishmash cabinet drawn from the ranks of business, the political right wing and even the PRI itself. (Newsweek 23.6. 2003, 34)

4.5

Strong subjective evaluation

English texts in particular contained very strong, negative evaluations of people (as in Example 7, and in Example 1 above), while in Finnish, such evaluations were infrequent and usually more moderate.

(7) French leaders themselves, even the strikingly narcissistic Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, do not make policy on the basis of national best sellers… (Newsweek 6.10. 2003, 26)

Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation 

In Example 8, the head word itself, egocentrism, is negative, and is further strengthened by the premodifier flamboyant; placing the NP in theme position makes Berlusconi’s egocentrism appear to be common knowledge.

(8) Given his [Berlusconi’s] flamboyant egocentrism, his plans for Europe were characteristically ambitious. (Newsweek 14.7. 2003, 31)

Berlusconi was a frequent target of not only negative premodifiers but also a wide range of negative nouns.

(9) These changes in Italian foreign policy have coloured European reaction to the great Berlusconi gaffe [comparing a German MEP to a Nazi concentration camp guard] (The Economist 12.7. 2003, 29)

The following is a rare example of positive evaluations (unless this is to be interpreted ironically): (10) The great consensus-builder [Tony Blair] finds himself alarmingly isolated. (The Economist 12.7. 2003, 36)

4.6

Ironic evaluation

The following heading of an editorial discussing the Californian election is clearly meant to be interpreted as irony. (11) Pelastava enkeli Schwarzenegger (Helsingin Sanomat 22.8. 2003, A4) [‘Saving angel Schwarzenegger’]

5. Comparison of English and Finnish texts In the Finnish texts, the total number of evaluative NPs was 165, in the English 496; the frequencies per 100 finite clauses were 17.4 and 23.7 respectively (see Table 2; because of the overlap of categories, no exact frequencies of each category can be given). English texts thus seem to use evaluative NPs somewhat more frequently. The difference in the number of what I interpreted as strong evaluations was not considerable (4/100 clauses and 5.8/100 clauses respectively), but it could be argued that the surprising bluntness of the English evaluations (such as in Examples 1 and 7 above) had an overall effect of greater strength and subjectivity. Strong evaluations often occurred in “neutral” English articles, not only in openly argumentative, subjective texts.

 Tiina Puurtinen

Table 2. Frequencies of evaluative NPs in Finnish and English texts.

evaluative NPs, total per 100 finite clauses strong evaluations, total per 100 finite clauses

Finnish

English

165 17.4 38 4

496 23.7 121 5.8

One thing to bear in mind when frequencies are compared is the tendency of the Finnish language to favour premodified constructions (Hakulinen & Karlsson 1979: 121), while English makes use of a wide variety of postmodifiers (Halliday 1994: 187–188). Hence, regardless of the (evaluative or non-evaluative) content of NPs, Finnish texts might be expected to use them more frequently than English. Because of this, NPs which correspond to a causal or concessive subordinate clause are likely to be more common in Finnish; in English, a premodified NP with a causal or concessive function cannot always be formed, and either a full clause or a non-finite or verbless clause expressing these functions is used. (Thus, the English translation of Example 3 above could read Though ostensibly retired, Arafat did not….) It was interesting to find that both English and Finnish texts used premodified NPs for negative rather than positive evaluations. Whether positive evaluations are linguistically realised by more explicit means (e.g. relative clauses) remains to be examined in further studies. To obtain more reliable and generalisable results, however, the research material should be balanced in both languages with regard to text types and representative of a wider variety of newspapers and periodicals.

6. Conclusion Assuming that the findings of the contrastive analysis of English and Finnish texts presented in this paper are sufficiently reliable to allow tentative conclusions, it might be suggested that Finnish news articles (i.e. texts presented as objective reports) use evaluative premodified NPs less frequently than English articles. Hence, a comparison of English news reports and their Finnish translations might yield interesting results. Translators could be assumed, for instance, to explicate evaluations by using relative clauses. The modality of an ST clause including an evaluative NP could also be altered by hedging or by adding a signal of subjectivity to the translation. Thus, in an article which readers are likely to consider an objective account of an event, instead of a subjective opinion text, a strong evaluation of the kind illustrated in Example 1 might be translated as follows: (12) the insufferably arrogant former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing sietämättömän ylimielisenä pidetty Valéry Giscard d’Estaing

Evaluative noun phrases in journalism and their translation 

[‘regarded as insufferably arrogant’] or sietämättömän ylimieliseksi väitetty Valéry Giscard d’Estaing [‘claimed to be insufferably arrogant’] In the Finnish translation, the evaluation would not be presented as a generally accepted truth but as the opinion of some unnamed person or group (on the opposite translation strategy, see Puurtinen forthcoming), which changes the interpersonal function of the NP. A further study based on more extensive and uniform material representing one text type only, i.e. English news articles and their Finnish translations, will reveal whether such translation strategies are actually applied and what their effect is on the text as a whole. To conclude, contrastive studies of the linguistic realisation of subjective opinions, among other things, yield useful information which translators should be aware of to be able to conform to language-specific text type conventions. However, the translation strategies applied to ST evaluations are ultimately determined by the purpose of the translation – neutral reporting or intentional manipulation of opinions – and the larger context, including not only the immediate cotext surrounding evaluations but perhaps also other texts on the same subject matter.

References van Dijk, Teun A. 1993. “Principles of critical discourse analysis”. Discourse & Society, 4(2): 249–283. van Dijk, Teun A. 1996. “Discourse, opinions and ideologies”. In Discourse and Ideologies, C. Schäffner and H. Kelly-Holmes (eds), 7–37. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Fairclough, Norman. 1990 [1989]. Language and Power. London: Routledge. Fairclough, Norman. 1995a. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman. Fairclough, Norman. 1995b. Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold. Fawcett, Peter. 1998. “Presupposition and translation”. In The Pragmatics of Translation, L. Hickey (ed.), 114–123. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Fowler, Roger. 1991. Language in the News. Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London & New York: Routledge. Fowler, Roger and Kress, Gunther. 1979. “Critical linguistics”. In Language and Control, R. Fowler, B. Hodge, G. Kress and T. Trew (eds), 185–213. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Hakulinen, Auli and Karlsson, Fred. 1979. Nykysuomen lauseoppia. Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia 350. Jyväskylä: Gummerus. Halliday, Michael A. K. 1985/1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hatim, Basil. 1997. Communication across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text Linguistics. Exeter: University of Exeter Press. Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge.

 Tiina Puurtinen Heikkinen, Vesa. 1999. Ideologinen merkitys kriittisen tekstintutkimuksen teoriassa ja käytännössä. Helsinki: SKS. Karhu, Anna. 1997. ”Suomennosten nominaalilausekkeiden piilopoikkeamat”. In Translation – Acquisition – Use, A. Mauranen and T. Puurtinen (eds), 71–87. AFinLA Yearbook 1997. Publications de l’Association Finlandaise de Linguistique Appliquée 55. Jyväskylä: AfinLA. Karvonen, Pirjo. 1995. Oppikirjateksti toimintana. Helsinki: SKS. Leech, Geoffrey. 1990 [1974]. Semantics: The Study of Meaning. London: Penguin Books. Levinson, Stephen C. 1984 [1983]. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press. Puurtinen, Tiina. 2000. “Translating linguistic markers of ideology”. In Translation in Context. Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Granada 1998, A. Chesterman, N. Gallardo San Salvador & Y. Gambier (eds), 177–186. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Puurtinen, Tiina. forthcoming. “How translator’s ideology affects source text ideology”. In Texts, Processes and Corpora, R. Jääskeläinen, T. Puurtinen and H. Stotesbury (eds). Simpson, Paul. 1993. Language, Ideology and Point of View. London: Longman. Solin, Anna. 1995. “Ideology, power, interpretation – an assessment of the social theory of critical linguistics”. The New Courant 4 (eds E. Ventola and A. Solin). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of English, 162–180. Thompson, John B. 1990. Ideology and Modern Culture: Critical and Social Theory in the Era of Mass Communication. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Translating the implicit On the inferencing and transfer of semantic relations Louise Denver Copenhagen Business School, Denmark

This study examines how translators translate a text characterised by a high level of implicit semantic relations between sentences. Six MA translation students and five experienced translators translated a text from Spanish into Danish. The task was performed on a computer, and all keystrokes were logged with Translog. The concurrent verbalisation was tape-recorded and the sessions were followed by short retrospective interviews. It was hypothesized that the strategic decision-making would, to some extent, result in explicitations in the target text and that the level of explicitness would be higher in the professional group. It was furthermore assumed that the process data would show a higher amount of mental processing when explicitations were made than when literal transfers were made. Finally, it was expected that data on the translation process of the professional group would contain indications of routine procedures as compared to the semi-professional group. The assumptions were, at least to some extent, supported by empirical data. However, the findings for the two groups of translators were not markedly different in all respects.

Keywords: inferencing, cohesive explicitation, implicit relations, triangulation, translation process

1. Introduction This exploratory study focuses on how translators deal with the task of translating from L2 (Spanish) to L1 (Danish) a text characterised by a high level of implicit semantic relations between sentences. The study has been limited to relations across sentence boundaries marked by a full stop in the source text (ST), and whose marking is optional, that is, not dictated by systematic or topological differences between the

 Louise Denver

source language (SL) and the target language (TL) (Klaudy 1998: 82). It is expected that in a text with a high level of argumentative implicitness, such as the text used in this study, successful inferencing will lead to strategic decisions towards cohesive explicitness in the target text (TT). However, this expectation may depend on the relational category. The semantic relations included in the study are the basic argumentative ones, i.e. the adversative relation and the causal relation. The level of explicitness is expected to be higher for adversative than for causal relations, since there is perhaps a general preference for explicit marking of adversative relations in English (Díez Prados 2003: 212, 223) and Swedish (Källgren, quoted in Englund Dimitrova 2003: 25). The marking may also vary according to the subcategory concerned. With regard to causality we find integrated “pure causes” [] at one end of a scale and, at the other end, peripheral “logical causes” [] with a wide range of rather vague semantic-pragmatic meanings (Galán Rodríguez 1999: 3606). The cognitive load involved in the successful inferencing of vague, subtle relations is expected to be heavier and explicitations a less obvious choice (cf. Tirkkonen-Condit 1992: 280; Pym 2005). The findings will be related to the explicitation hypothesis, to be understood as an “asymmetry hypothesis”, where explicitations in translations from L2 to L1 are not always counterbalanced by implicitations in translations from L1 to L2 (Vinay and Darbelnet 1958; Blum-Kulka 1986; Séguinot 1988; Englund Dimitrova 1993; TirkkonenCondit 1993; Klaudy 1993 and 1998; Pym 2005). It has been suggested by Pym (quoted in Chesterman 1997: 119) that competent translators should be able to generate alternative translations of an item, the “item” in this case being implicit semantic relations. The only alternative to a literal, i.e. implicit, transfer of an implicit relation is to make it explicit. So in order to meet the requirement of alternative solutions, translators should be able to infer the argumentative structure of the ST correctly, whether or not they eventually opt for explicitation in the TT. With regard to the alternatives, explicitation or literal transfer, the following question was asked: to what extent do we find evidence of mental processing activities involved in the inferencing when literal transfers have been made? It can be assumed that routine procedures and decision-making are progressively incorporated in the translation process with the growing experience of the translator and that highly frequent phenomena such as the translation of semantic relations would, to some extent, be integrated into experienced translators’ routine procedures. Some support for this assumption is reported in Jääskeläinen (1996: 67), who found that professional translators direct a greater part of their attention to text comprehension than translators with little experience, who tend to focus more on linguistic problem solving.

Translating the implicit 

2. Design of the experiment An experiment was carried out with two groups of translators: five expert translators with at least ten years of postgraduate professional experience and six semi-professionals (MA translation students). The empirical data were elicited by a combination of tape-recorded think-aloud (TAP) and keystroke logging in Translog (Jakobsen 1999). The participants were interviewed briefly immediately after the translation task had been completed; they were asked to comment on their problem solving in general and, more specifically, on the question of textual cohesion. An argumentative newspaper text belonging to the register ‘literary journalism’ commenting on the double standards of the Catholic Church, taken from the Spanish quality newspaper El País Semanal, was chosen for the experiments (for a characterisation of this type of register, see Calsigmilia Blancafort & Tusón Valls 2004: 255). A long complex text exhibiting the network nature of argumentation was chosen to give us an insight into the inferencing and explicitation patterns in a discourse perspective. Subsequently, argumentative connectives were deleted from the original text in co-texts where the relations remained constant, that is, they could be inferred from the propositional content of the co-text (the ST can be seen in Appendix 1, where the connectives of the original text are shown in bold type). Finally, a Spanish native speaker who is an expert in Translation Studies was consulted on the argumentative structure of the ST; she was asked to identify and categorise the semantic relations of the ST and decide if she would have made any explicit markings if she had written the text. The ST contains ten implicit semantic relations: six adversative and four causal relations. In the set of adversative relations, four were marked in the original text by means of adversative connectives, one by means of the additive connective y and one by means of the adversative-concessive connective aunque (‘although’). The Spanish translation expert inferred the same six adversative relations, and she stressed that, in her opinion, they should all be marked in Spanish by means of connectives.1 As for the causal relations, only one was marked in the original text by means of porque (‘because’). Our expert recognised causality in all four relations, but preferred no marking of the relations in Spanish, at least not by means of the connective porque, since it would eliminate the relational vagueness. The translation was a non-routine task for all the translators involved. A non-routine translation was chosen, because non-routine tasks are supposed to require a higher degree of conscious decision-making than routine jobs (Jääskeläinen 1996: 67). No time limit was set for the translation assignment. The professional group was asked to translate the entire ST (740 words), while the semi-professionals were given the same ST, but were asked to translate parts of it only (436 words; the passages that were omitted are shown in brackets in Appendix 1). This was a necessary decision, though it went against the purpose of this study. As a consequence, the data that were judged to be affected by the unequal experimental conditions have been left out of the analyses, e.g. data on time meas-

 Louise Denver

urement (where other variables would interfere, such as the time delay caused by think-aloud (Jakobsen 2003)). For the same reason, the semantic relations on which the analyses are based were restricted to the relations between text segments that have been translated by both groups of translators.

3. Analysis of the product data As can be seen from the data for the professional group of translators in Table 1, the professionals add between two and five connectives to their TT; on average, they add 3.8 connectives. Table 1. Product data. The number of TT explicitations for the group of professional translators 10 ST relations

TT explicitations

Professional 1 Professional 2 Professional 3 Professional 4 Professional 5

4 2 5* 4 4

Average

3.8

*One connective is not acceptable

The corresponding data for the semi-professional group can be seen in Table 2. The variation is the same: between two and five connectives have been added to the TT, on average 3.3 connectives. Table 2. Product data. The number of TT explicitations for the group of semi-professional translators 10 ST relations

TT explicitations

Semi-professional 1 Semi-professional 2 Semi-professional 3 Semi-professional 4 Semi-professional 5 Semi-professional 6

3 3* 3 2 4 5

Average

3.3

*One connective is not acceptable

Translating the implicit 

If the average level of TT explicitness in the professional group is compared with that of the semi-professionals, we find (1) that the average level of explicitness chosen for the TTs is limited and (2) that the difference between the two groups is not very marked. If we compare the average level of explicitness chosen for each of the two relational categories in the TTs, we find a marked difference (Table 3). Table 3. Product data. TT explicitations for the two groups of translators according to relational category Adversative relations (6 ST relations) TT explicitations

Causal relations (4 ST relations) TT explicitations

5 Professionals 6 Semi-professionals

15 (50%) 17 (47.2%)*

4 (20%)* 3 (12.5%)

Average

48.5%

15.9%

*One connective is not acceptable

The average TT marking of adversative relations is noticeably higher, i.e. 48.5%, than that of causal relations, which amounts to 15.9%. The same tendency is observed in both groups. A comparison between the level of explicitness chosen for the two types of relation would suggest that the observations made by Díez Prados for English and Källgren for Swedish concerning a preference for explicit marking of adversative relations could, at least to some extent, be extended to Danish. About half of the adversative relations have been left unmarked in the TTs, so the term “preference” would not be justified by our findings. However, it must be borne in mind that causality can be vague (relation 8 and 9) and, in this case, explicitation would not be the obvious choice. The distribution of the explicitations in the TTs, which can be seen in Table 4, reveals a highly uneven pattern in actual discourse with marked variations in the levels of explicitness within one and the same category. The figures could indicate that co-textual variables interfere with the translators’ inferencing and/or decision-making. If we focus on two relations with low levels of explicitness (R7: two correct explicitations; R8: no correct explicitations), we find examples of dubious or even faulty translations in the sentence before the relation. As for the adversative-concessive relation 7, seven TTs contain translations of questionable acceptability: Not all children are alike, instead of equal. Apparently, the ST has not been fully understood, which makes it difficult, if not impossible to infer the relation. As for relation 8, we find four cases of faulty translations in the preceding sentence, two of which have led to the addition of an adversative marker in line with the “new” meaning of the TT. A total of thirteen such cases were found, five in the professional and eight in the semi-professional group. In eleven of these cases, a literal transfer has been made. With respect to adversative relation 4, however, the consensus on an im-

 Louise Denver

plicit transfer of the relation cannot be explained by problems of text comprehension or linguistic problem solving. Table 4. Product data. The distribution of explicitations in the TTs for both groups of translators 5 professionals TT explicitations

6 semi-professionals TT explicitations

Total

3 5 2 0 1 3 0 1* 0 4

5 2 2 0 0 4 2 1* 0 4

8 7 4 0 1 7 2 2 0 8

Relation 1: adversative Relation 2: adversative Relation 3: causal Relation 4: adversative Relation 5: causal Relation 6: adversative Relation 7: adv.-concessive Relation 8: causal Relation 9: causal Relation 10: adversative *One connective is not acceptable

4. Analysis of the process data 4.1

The Translog files

It has been shown that experienced translators process larger translation units than less experienced translators (Jakobsen 2003). Information on segmentation can be provided by the log files. Following the (ad-hoc) criteria in Jakobsen (2003: 89), pausedefined segmentation was chosen. A segment is here defined as any length of keystrokes, including spaces, between two pauses of five seconds or more. The average number of segments of the two groups of translators of five seconds (or more) per 100 ST characters can be seen in Tables 5 and 6. The average number of segments per 100 ST characters turns out to be 7.3 for the professional group and 8.25 for the semi-professionals, a difference of 0.95. Bigger differences are found at the individual level and, surprisingly enough, they are most marked in the professional group, with a variation between 5.87 and 9.05. The segmentation data seem to correspond with the product data: no clear distinction can be seen between the two groups from an analysis of the segmentation data (patterns in the cognitive processing of the ST).

Translating the implicit 

Table 5. Segmentation figures for the professional group No. of segments/ 100 ST characters Professional 1 Professional 2 Professional 3 Professional 4 Professional 5

9.05 6.93 6.12 5.87 8.57

Average

7.30

Table 6. Segmentation figures for the semi-professional group No. of segments/ 100 ST characters Semi-professional 1 Semi-professional 2 Semi-professional 3 Semi-professional 4 Semi-professional 5 Semi-professional 6

8.03 8.95 7.36* 8.55 7.36* 9.27

Average

8.25

*The number of segments is identical.

The log data on the translation phases of the translators reveal the following patterns. In the writing phase, the professionals tend to add connectives to the TT when they start translating a new sentence. The markers are added in the “right” position in the linear sequence, and when no pause is made before a new sentence, connectives are added with a minimum of delay, after the translator has written the few words needed to infer the relation. The pattern of the semi-professionals in this phase is more or less the same, though they tend to be slightly more hesitant. However, the decision-making activities at group level are markedly different in the revision phase (Table 7). Table 7. Process data. TT explicitations made in the writing and the revision phase TT explicitations 5 professionals 6 semi-professionals

The writing phase

The revision phase

18 13

1 7

In contrast with the professionals, who retain the strategic choices made in the writing phase, the semi-professionals tend to reconsider the cohesive marking in the revision phase, where seven connectives have been added to the TTs by four semi-professionals.

 Louise Denver

On average, 35% of the connectives have been inserted in the revision phase. These data support the assumption that experience facilitates professional translators’ decisionmaking about strategic choices of connection: they tend to follow routine procedures. Now, do we also find evidence that connectives once added to the TTs have been deleted at a later stage in the writing phase or in the revision phase? Such revisions would mean that the participants have inferred the semantic relation, but eventually opted for a literal transfer. The answer provided by the log data is clear: in no case has a connective been deleted at a later stage by any participant. Krings (1986: 121) states that a pause before a unit is a (secondary) indicator of problem-solving. Since the typographical sentence is a common unit of comprehension (Séguinot 1996: 82), pauses are generally made before a new sentence. Pauses can indicate mental processing of a problem unit in the following (or preceding) sentence or of the relation between the two sentences. Thus, pauses cannot be used as problem indicators. However, the opposite, namely the absence of an initial pause, would indicate minimal mental processing. As expected, this kind of negative evidence was found to a limited extent. A total of six translators made no initial pause before the sentence after causal relation 3 and adversative relation 4. Other problem indicators are corrections, especially when translation errors caused by misinterpretations of the ST in the first draft are corrected in the revision phase. With regard to causal relation 8, the translation of a unit in the preceding sentence (debía de, meaning here ‘apparently was’) was a challenge to seven participants. According to the product data, there were four cases of unacceptable translations (one professional and three semi-professionals). The log data complement the picture, giving evidence of three first draft misinterpretations which were corrected in the revision phase by three professionals.

4.2

The think-aloud protocols and the retrospective interviews

The think-aloud protocols (TAPs) show that vocabulary problems are overwhelmingly a feature of the semi-professional group. One semi-professional states that when she consults the dictionary, this is not to check the meaning of a word, but simply because she has no idea of what the word means. All participants spend considerable time discussing their problems with text comprehension and the disambiguation of ST cohesion of two types: anaphor and reference. However, the verbalisation concerning the relations between sentences is generally limited to the time it takes to read aloud (and write down) a sequence with the connective in the appropriate place, occasionally accompanied by short comments. Apart from the concurrent reading aloud when (or before) writing a sequence, the verbalisations contain two kinds of information: (1) a metalinguistic comment on the relational category, e.g. “I would like to stress the contrast”; (2) an indication of the reason why a marker is added: “it sounds a bit disjointed in Danish”. Comments are more frequent, more extensive and more informative (type 2) in the professional group

Translating the implicit 

where all the translators point out the need to create a fluent Danish TT rendering of the meaning of the ST. The verbal reports support the data analysed so far in two respects: (1) they comment on adversative linking excluding causality; (2) no comment was found on literal transfers of a relation. The retrospective interviews were analysed focussing particularly on three aspects: (1) routine procedures; (2) consistency between what the participants state they have done retrospectively and what they actually did while writing their TT, as evidenced by the product and process data analysed above; (3) the category to which the explicitations belong: “reader-based” or “text-based” explicitations (Blum-Kulka 1986; Klaudy 1993 and 1998; Séguinot 1996; Englund Dimitrova 2003; Pym 2005). By routine procedure we refer to practice where strategic decision-making requires little time because the difficulties of translating similar units have been solved on repeated occasions. It does not imply that identical solutions are chosen or that the decisions cannot be made consciously. In the professional group, three translators (four explicitations each) stated that they had made conscious choices in order to raise the argumentative explicitness in the TT; they thought that the Danish text would not function as a text in its own right without explicitations. Two professionals seemed somewhat surprised when asked about textual coherence/cohesion. One (five explicitations) simply stated that the ST cohered nicely. According to the TAP, however, she had made the local choices consciously. The other professional (two explicitations) stated that she had given no thought to the question of connection (and that she was not in the habit of doing so). In the TAP she had made no comment on the connectives she had added to the TT. In her case, the procedure would appear to be automatised. An analysis of the data suggests that, in varying degrees, the strategic decisions were made by the professionals on a routine basis: their decisions were made quickly, they did not hesitate before adding connectives, they retained their initial choices and they did not question the appropriateness of their choices in the retrospective interviews. The observations of the semi-professionals on their global strategy were not quite consistent with their local choices. Three semi-professionals (two/three/three explicitations) stated that they had opted for TT explicitations, but the data show that they had only acted accordingly to a limited extent. One semi-professional (three explicitations) stands out from the rest of the translators. She is the only participant in the experiment who claimed ST fidelity to be her first priority and to have chosen a direct transfer of the implicit argumentative ST style to her TT (although not totally so). The statements of the translators seem to reveal that the semantic relations that have been transferred literally have not been subject to conscious mental processing. The translators who observe that they chose to raise the level of relational explicitness in the TT, also actually did so. However, they do not seem to realise that although they have added some connectives, their TT still exhibits a relatively high level of relational implicitness. A distinction is generally made between “reader-based shifts” linked to the norm systems prevailing in the target culture and “text-based shifts” traceable to the translation process per se (Blum-Kulka 1986 :24). Three professional and five semi-profes-

 Louise Denver

sional translators claim that their first priority was to produce a coherent and fluent Danish TT in accordance with TL norms. In this way, globally, eight translators opted for reader-based shifts in their TTs. However, the comments on explicitation made locally in the TAPs cannot be categorised with certainty (pp. 230–231). While the explanatory type of comment (“it sounds a bit disjointed in Danish”) can be classified as “reader-based”, we find it hazardous to attempt a categorisation of the metalinguistic type of comment (“I would like to stress the contrast”). As pointed out by Pym (2005), the two categories overlap; translation presupposes a dual personality: the translator is a reader and a mediator. Nevertheless, we believe that the analyses in this study are of relevance to the explicitation hypothesis, which find some support in the empirical data of this study.

5. Conclusion The two groups of participants in the experiment turned out to exhibit comparable behaviour to a higher extent than had been expected with respect to the TT explicitation figures (tables 1 and 2). The assumption of strategic choices towards TT explicitness was by and large supported by the findings, as was the expectation of varying levels of TT explicitness according to relational category/subcategory (table 3 and section 1). The uneven distribution of explicitations in the TTs with variations between 0 and 8 explicitations in the adversative category (table 4) could indicate that co-textual variables interfere in the inferencing process. There is some positive evidence of this in the product data in that there are TTs (or first drafts of these) which exhibit translation errors detrimental to successful inferencing of a relation. The process data provide further support in this respect: the presence of corrections performed in the first draft of the sentence preceding the relation; the fact that there are no instances of deletions of explicitations made in the writing phase (which is something which would have indicated inferencing); the absence of comments on implicit transfers of semantic relations; the absence of initial pauses before a new sentence to allow for mental processing; and, last but not least, the absence of verbalised recognition of the rather high overall level of the relational implicitness in the translations. Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that the evidence provided by the process data is indirect. The assumption that routine procedures with regard to cohesion correlate with experience was also supported by the process data, which showed that the professionals tended to retain their initial strategic choices to a much higher degree than the semi-professionals (table 7). Furthermore, their verbalisations on strategic decision-making indicated a higher degree of consistency between their global and local strategic decisions as well as a higher level of confidence. Finally, the exploratory nature of this study and the tentative character of the findings should be stressed. The issues discussed here require further study.

Translating the implicit 

Note 1.

María Pilar Lorenzo (Copenhagen Business School).

Appendix 1 Spanish source text: Santa Madre by Antonio Muñoz Molina, El País Semanal, 25th February 2001. La santa Iglesia católica prohíbe a sus fieles el control de la natalidad y el uso del preservativo y aconseja a las monjas misioneras que tomen anticonceptivos. [Tan pintoresca paradoja quizá tenga que ver con la respuesta que el por tantos motivos entrañable ex obispo de San Sebastián dio a unas señoras católicas que fueron a sugerirle que quizá la Iglesia debería mostrar hacia las víctimas del terrorismo al menos una solicitud semejante a la que dedica a los terroristas presos.] Estos últimos lo son en virtud de crímenes que cometieron deliberadamente. ←R1: adversative; ST: y (and)→ Aquéllas lo han sido contra su voluntad. Molesta y dolorosa, la separación que sufren los presos y sus familias es remediable. ←R2: adversative; ST: mientras que (whereas)→ No hay modo de que los seres queridos de las víctimas se reúnan más con ellas, al menos en este mundo terrenal. [El noble prelado, que al parecer celebraba su audiencia campechanamente tirado en su sofá, respondió a sus visitantes con una pregunta que desde entonces se ha hecho célebre: “¿Y dónde está escrito que un padre deba querer por igual a todos sus hijos?”] En mi cualidad de hijo, y también en la de padre –padre biológico y no espiritual o virtual, como monseñor Setién-, esa pregunta suya me ha sumido en graves cavilaciones. ←R3: causal; ST: implicit→ Hombre, si él, que sabe tanta teología, dice que no está escrito en ninguna parte que los padres deban querer por igual a todos los hijos, será que no lo está. ←R4: adversative; ST: pero (but)→ Cuando uno es hijo le gusta pensar que no es menos querido que sus hermanos y cuando es padre se da cuenta del valor que tiene para la estabilidad sentimental de los niños la conciencia de que no hay privilegios ni desigualdades entre hermanos y de la espantosa injusticia que cometen un padre o una madre cuando se dejan llevar por afinidades o preferencias hasta el extremo impúdico de prodigarle a un hijo lo que escatiman al otro. Quizá si un padre alberga en su corazón esa mezquindad debería esforzarse en no hacerla visible. ←R5: causal; ST: porque (because)→ Es posible que no haya amargura más decisiva en una existencia humana que la de quien siente que no fue querido por sus padres. [Bien es verdad que la paternidad de monseñor Setién y la maternidad de la santa madre iglesia son de más sustancia espiritual que las de los hombres y mujeres comunes. Nosotros no podemos entender los designios del cielo.] Desde un punto de vista celestial, es comprensible que una monja tome anticonceptivos. ←R6: adversative; ST:

 Louise Denver

pero (but)→ No es lícito que una mujer pobre y trabajadora, en uno de esos países en los que los hombres son poco más que parásitos brutales, procure no tener más hijos de los que puede alimentar o no verse esclavizada por una maternidad que le quiebre la salud y le esclavice sin remedio la vida. La santa madre y los diversos santos padres que la sirven en el mundo se desviven por la salud y la integridad del embrión humano. Pero una vez que ha llegado a este valle de lágrimas prefieren que conserve su integridad espiritual, aunque contraiga y difunda enfermedades terribles, a que cometa el pecado gravísimo de mantener relaciones sexuales usando un preservativo. No todos los hijos son iguales. ←R7: adversative-concessive; ST: aunque (although)→ A ojos profanos pueden parecer hijos legítimos. [Para la Iglesia católica, con excepciones individuales y heroicas, los judíos eran más hijastros renegados que hijos de Dios. Ni su persecución ni su exterminio durante la II Guerra Mundial movieron al Vaticano a un solo gesto claro y compasivo. Las altas autoridades eclesiásticas tampoco hicieron nada cuando los perseguidos fueron católicos opuestos al fascismo. Su santidad Pío XII, tan prudente a la hora de distanciarse de los nazis, bautizó con veloz entusiasmo de cruzada la sublevación militar del general Franco.] Gregorio Ordóñez, que en paz descanse, que era un demócrata ejemplar y un católico conservador y fervoroso, no debía de ser uno de esos hijos que merecen el cariño pleno de la santa madre. ←R8: causal*; ST: implicit→ A Gregorio Ordóñez los buenos padres jesuitas de San Sebastián le negaron el cobijo de sus sedes eclesiásticas para un funeral en el quinto aniversario de su asesinato. ←R9: causal; ST: implicit→ Los padres, tan apolíticos, temían que se politizara impíamente el acto.** Uno pensaba que la muerta lo igualaba todo. ←R10: adversative; ST: pero (but)→ Incluso después de muertos hay hijos más queridos que otros. [Con padres así no es raro que las iglesias están cada vez más huérfanas de feligreses ni que haya cada vez más hijos saludablemente emancipados de una protección tan bondadosa, tan desigual.] * The relation is vague and could be explicited by means of es que. ** The relational content (disagreement/disapproval) is contained in an idiomatic phrase in Spanish as well as Danish (And I thought...).

Translating the implicit 

References Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1986. “Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation”. In Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, J. House and S. Blum-Kulka (eds), 17–35. Tübingen: Narr. Calsamiglia Blancafort, Helena and Tusón Valls, Amparo. 2003. Las cosas del decir. Manual de análisis del discurso. Barcelona: Ariel Lingüística. Chesterman, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Díez Prados, Mercedes. 2003. Coherencia y cohesión en textos escritos en inglés por alumnos de filología inglesa (estudio empírico). Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares. Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta. 2003. Explicitation in Russian-Swedish translation: sociolinguistic and pragmatic aspects. In Swedish Contributions to the Thirteenth International Congress of Slavists. Ljubljana, 15–21 August, B. Englund Dimitrova and A. Pereswetoff-Morath (eds), 21–31. Lund: Slavica Lundensia Suplementa. Galán Rodríguez, Carmen. 1999. “La subordinación causal y final”. In Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española, I. Bosque and V. Demonte (eds), 3597–3642. Madrid: Real Academia Española. Jakobsen, Arnt L. 1999. “Logging target text production with Translog”. In Probing the process in translation: methods and results, G. Hansen (ed.), 9–20. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Jakobsen, Arnt L. 2003. “Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision, and segmentation”. In Triangulating Translation, F. Alves (ed.), 69–95. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Jääskeläinen, Riitta. 1996. “Hard work will bear beautiful fruit. A comparison of two thinkaloud protocol studies”. Meta XLI (1): 60–74. Klaudy, Kinga. 1993. “On the explicitation hypothesis”. In Transferre necesse est…Current issues of translation theory, K. Klaudy et al. (eds), 69–77. Szombathely: Daniel Berzsenyi College. Klaudy, Kinga. 1998. “Explicitation”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, M. Baker (ed.), 80–84. London: Routledge. Krings, Hans P. 1986. Was in den Köpfen von Übersetzern vorgeht. Tübingen: Narr. Pym, Anthony. 2005. Explaining explicitation. Available on-line at http://www.fut.es/~apym/ welcome.html Séguinot, Candace. 1996. Some thoughts about think-aloud protocols. Target 8 (1): 75–95. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja. 1992. “What happens to a uniquely Finnish particle in the processes and products of translation”. In IV Scandinavian Symposium on Translation Theory: Translation and Knowledge, Turku, 4.–6.6., Y. Gambier and J. Tommola (eds), 273–284. Turku: University of Turku. Vinay, Jean-Paul and Darbelnet, Jean. 1958. Stylistique Comparée du Français et de l’Anglais. Paris: Didier.

Divisions, description and applications The interface between DTS, corpus-based research and contrastive analysis* Rosa Rabadán University of León, Spain

The intersections of DTS with other related disciplines can provide potential sources of enrichment that go beyond the usual methodological divisions. This seems to be the case of corpus-based contrastive analysis which, while sharing procedures and research protocols that are properly referred to as descriptive, emerges as a valuable tool for applied translation purposes. This paper sets out to outline the ACTRES corpus-based research procedure for identifying the reasons underlying language-pair problems in translation, and analyzing the problematic areas in an application-oriented way. The aim is to establish crosslinguistic regularities and to formulate an inventory of descriptively correct translation options/solutions. These constitute the basis for application building.

Keywords: translation applications, DTS, contrastive analysis, corpus-based research, ACTRES

1. Introduction The relationship between contrastive analysis and translation is well-documented, and concerns about lack of cooperation between researchers in the two fields have been frequently voiced (Chesterman 1998 :6) yet mostly ignored by both communities. The development of corpus-based studies (and their obvious importance in both areas) has highlighted the pressing need for resource-sharing (Granger 2003: 26) and for finding ways to put what we already have to new use(s). It is the aim of this paper to show how to draw on the interdependencies among these three areas – contrastive analysis, translation studies, corpus-based studies – in order to obtain application-oriented data. Translation applications here are purpose-spe-

 Rosa Rabadán

cific aids to translating/evaluation/revising/training, etc., which are susceptible to semiautomation and which can be used in conjunction with existing applications. I will first focus briefly on the contribution of each field to the interface as opposed to their legitimate pursuits as separate, independent disciplines. Then I will provide a brief exposition of the approach and the research questions posed. The subsequent sections focus on the way comparable and parallel corpus data are used in the ACTRES1 project (Rabadán et al. 2004) and the type(s) of information that can be obtained. The illustrative case provided is an item in the modality-necessity field, a problem area for the English-Spanish language pair. The final part of the paper expounds the relevance of the procedure and the possible ways to use the data obtained. The discussion will concentrate solely on the grammatical level and directionality is English into Spanish. Conceptualization is restricted to semantic cross-labelling; no claims of universality are made for it.2

2. Contrastive analysis, DTS and corpus-based studies Contrastive analysis (CA) provides the necessary cross-linguistic core underlying any translation consideration. When considered as a separate area, its aim is to unveil cross-language differences and similarities between two or more languages (Ramón García 2002). This is done within the theoretical and methodological framework of one given linguistic model (Willems et al. 2004). When taken as part of our broader enterprise, the aim is to identify those functions expressed by source-language means that are not equally conveyed by “similar” expressive resources in the target language in order to establish the systematic differences and correspondences between the two language systems. The aim of Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) is to unveil regularities in translational behaviour from empirical data collected by different procedures. The level at which these regularities are to be located and the name they should receive is a matter of contention that has been given much attention (Tymoczko 1998; Toury 2004). But it is not immediately evident from the description of translation practices how you should proceed in the event of problems when translating, or how to interpret or assess shifts, or what these translation solutions are, or how they are different from common, “neutral” practice. The questions are how to decide what is deviant and search for the reasons for it, and how to make decisions when unaware of the available possibilities of expression. Whereas DTS is key and central in the descriptive-explanatory approach to translation research, it can be allocated a more instrumental position and used as a way to supply not obviously corresponding translation solutions for those gaps (i. e. functions that are encoded in the source language by the chosen expressive resource but not so by the “perceived cross-language similar” form in the target language) encountered in the cross-linguistic contrast. As a discipline in its own right corpus linguistics (CL) focuses on the automatic or computer-aided analysis of large bodies of naturally occurring language (corpora). Its

Divisions, description and applications 

aim is to produce objective statements about different aspects of language based on empirical data (http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/monkey/ihe/linguistics/contents.htm, accessed 9/02/05). Corpus-based analysis introduces the empirical outlook to the interface and contributes a methodology geared towards quantitative data as well as to a much-needed objectivity on which translational qualitative statements can be based (Granger 2003: 21–22). Comparable corpora (multilingual corpora in Baker 1995) are the tool par excellence of the contrastive linguist, and they help unveil the cross-linguistic differences and similarities in problem areas. If adequate and representative monolingual corpora are readily available it makes sense to explore how to make them the source corpus of one (or more) comparable corpora; i.e. extracting from them phenomenon-specific corpora. From this type of contrast both quantitative and qualitative information is obtained on the actual real picture in each language. DTS is associated with parallel corpora (also translation corpora), and its contribution to the ACTRES interface is to fill in the blanks left by the contrastive analysis carried out on the “comparable” data. By using this type of corpora, problems are located by adopting a target-based perspective, and access is gained to alternative, less central expressive resources. While statistical data are no doubt important, it is the qualitative results that keep the door open for further research and more advanced applications (Tymoczko 1998: 654).

3. Contrasting empirical data: using the comparable corpora The first module in the research sequence is not translational at all, as it deals basically with non-translated language. Using CA as a tool to identify interlanguage gaps and quantitative divergences amounts to recognizing that the primary interest lies in differences, either quantitative or – more importantly in principle – qualitative. To this end, a functional perspective has been adopted, drawing specifically on the concept of functional-semantic fields put forward by Russian linguist Bondarko (1991). Basically, Bondarko defends the idea of a polysystemic interface, in which one semantic function (e. g. necessity) is associated with one central form but also uses other less central forms to convey the same function. The form-meaning association may involve different categories in different languages, e. g. modal verbs in English, periphrastic constructions and/or mood in Spanish. The reasons for the choice of this model are that i) when used cross-linguistically, it allows the researcher to easily account for the different grammatical resources conveying a given meaning using a center-periphery model which is quite familiar to translation scholars, and ii) unlike models which favour mostly a form-to-meaning analysis (Taylor 2003: 172–181), Bondarko’s proposal permits one to start either from a form or from a function, or change from one to another in the course of the description. Going from form to meaning results in a semasiological description, and going from meaning to form will

 Rosa Rabadán

lead to an onomasiological description, or a combination of both, if our final goals so demand (Labrador de la Cruz 2004: 362–364). A further advantage is that the model is flexible enough to permit the utilization of interpretations done under various theoretical models at different stages as needed.

3.1

Tools and procedure

The data used in ACTRES come from two general language monolingual reference corpora: the Bank of English (http://www.collins.co.uk/books.aspx?group=153) [accessed 28/03/07] and the Corpus de Referencia del Español Actual (CREA http://corpus.rae.es/creanet.html) [accessed 28/03/07]. Since researchers obtain phenomenonspecific corpora from them, both act as source corpora. Availability and representativeness decided corpus selection and, as the choice was target-based, the characteristics of CREA were the prime motive for choosing the Bank of English (Rabadán: in press). One of them, chronological span, was decisive for the selection. The second reason for this choice concerns internal architecture. Both corpora offer the same type of textual material and the same possibility of choosing between different varieties of the language, which makes them qualitatively comparable. Although both corpora include vast quantities of text, the subcorpora utilized contain over 30 million words in English and approximately 37 million words in Spanish. These subcorpora represent written language, British English, for the English corpus, and written language, European Spanish, for the Spanish language corpus. The analysis of corpus materials was organized in four different stages (cf. Krzeszowski’s 3-step method 1990: 35): selection, description, juxtaposition and contrast. The information to be obtained from the analysis of the comparable data is basically the shared, cross-linguistic, meaning-form associations and the (potential) interlinguistic gaps.

3.2

Selection

The selection stage starts with the identification of those resource(s) in the SL known to be a source of translation problems and the semantic area they belong in (modality, aspectuality, etc.). In accordance with the goal stated at the beginning, this choice of input explicitly depends on knowledge derived from translation competence and only translation-problem areas are selected for analysis. Invoking the principle of “perceived similarity” (cf. constraint of relevant similarity in Chesterman 1998: 69) will help locate the cross-linguistic perceived equivalents in the target language. This can be phrased as follows: when looking for translation solutions, translators tend to first consider those resources in the TL that are perceived as being similar to the SL means being analyzed. One way or another, this unspecific, intuitive procedure underlies most attempts at contrasting languages (Ivir 1981, among others).

Divisions, description and applications 

The questions to be asked at this point concern the relative centrality and/or significance of the resources in the language concerned: – Are the expressive means perceived as being cross-linguistic correspondents associated with one particular semantic area in each language? In other words, how central/peripheral are these linguistic resources in this functional-semantic field in English and in Spanish? – Do the “similarly perceived” Spanish resources normally express the same or a different function compared to that of their English inputs? If so, what are the correspondences and what are the cross-linguistic gaps? Selecting also means deciding about the querying item, string etc. Although in Spanish verbs the question of morphological inflection is, with few exceptions, always present, the choice of search item is fairly straightforward (see Table 1). There are, however, cases of extreme structural dissimilarity between the “perceived similars” in one language and the other, e.g. the English hypothetical modal would and its “perceived similar” forms in Spanish – the conditional tenses. While in English, searching would is simple enough, the interest is on the meanings this modal form imposes on the lexical verbs that follow. In Spanish we face a full conjugation of different verbs, which means that we have to make decisions concerning the querying item(s) so that the CREA can be successfully searched. In this particular case, it involved using frequency lists in order to choose ten top-frequency verbs, searching for each of them separately and statistically adjusting the distribution of the sample to the findings (Rabadán: in press). Table 1. Modality-necessity selection FORM MUST DEBER + INF

N

SAMPLE

16,134 33,164

390 395

Sampling is also part of the selection stage. It means defining the number of cases that will constitute the threshold of representativeness and consequently, the statistical sample. So far the actual objects of study have been selected by applying the formula n= N/(N-1)E2+1, where n is the representative sample (the number of cases to be analysed), N the population (the total number of occurrences yielded by the search) and E the margin of error (0.05).3

3.3

Description

Qualitative description involves two different tasks (which are not linear in time): first, going through the linguistic and grammatical treatment of the resource in both traditions separately; second, finding common ground to capitalize upon. The former,

 Rosa Rabadán

which is semasiological, utilizes the findings of previous linguistic description, either functional or otherwise depending on availability, and aims at analyzing semantically the examples selected as the sample in the previous stage. The common ground part may be the hardest. It implies hitting upon a level of abstraction which is suitable for our purposes and finding the way to translate it into meaning labels for the different functions conveyed by the resource under study. It has been observed that using the taxonomies or labels of linguistics is neither sustainable nor practicable for (applied) translation purposes (Halverson 1998: 500), as they are not a tool, but rather an end in itself. The building of translation-geared, cross-linguistic labelling starts from the above-mentioned semasiological stage, and goes on to the comparable empirical data so as to test the validity of the initial labels. More often than not this process requires a number of both semasiological (form to meaning) and onomasiological (meaning to form) movements along with subsequent modifications of our tentative labelling until the relevant level of generalization and abstraction for the language pair and language varieties under analysis has been reached. Another important question arising at this stage is how to produce categories that are as self-explanatory as possible. Self-explanatory here means that if they are to be part of an application it is necessary that they stand for a type of meaningful tagging which is easily recognizable by users and relevant and applicable to the English-Spanish pair. An illustrative case is provided by the different ways of labelling necessity meanings in English/Spanish. I tested my cross labelling on two groups of potential users: one was composed of advanced undergraduate students of modern languages and the other consisted of professional and/or trained translators. Both the students and my other informant group just looked blank when confronted with terms such as deontic or epistemic. They reported that anything aiming to help with checking out meaning interpretations needs to be simple to locate and easily graspable, two qualities that did not apply to, for example, the notion of “subjective epistemic possibility”. Then there was the fact that categorizations that worked for English were not at all relevant in Spanish. In other words, the level of semantic abstraction for each language in this particular area was different, which as mentioned above, is one of the recurrent traits when isolating translation problems. Not surprisingly, my users were far happier and more receptive to my proposal when provided with labels such as ‘obligation’, ‘confident inference’, ‘command’, etc. The quantitative description will yield the typicality rates of uses in each language separately. Obviously it is preceded in the sequence by a qualitative description, as the typicality rates apply to instances of a label x, y or z. These statistics contribute pragmatic information about the use and distribution of meanings in each language and provide a lead to the uncovering of gaps not immediately evident. Typicality rates are of capital importance when considered in a wider perspective: once the statistics have been completed (including all the stages discussed here) for the majority of the resources for one given functional-semantic field, it is feasible to prioritize functions or items in terms of translation-geared labelling.

Divisions, description and applications 

The description stage typically contributes the shared (or otherwise) cross-linguistic meaning-form associations in English and in Spanish. Tables 2 and 3 below display the type of results that can be obtained. As is the case of the data in Table 1, these pertain to the modality-necessity area and will be the illustrative case henceforth. Table 2. Description of MUST MEANINGS

CASES

%

OBLIGATION PASSIVE OBLIGATION CONFIDENT INFERENCE

174 119 97

44.62 30.51 24.87

TOTAL

390

100

Table 3. Description of DEBER + INFINITIVE MEANINGS

INDICATIVE

%

SUBJUNCTIVE

%

PASSIVE OBLIGATION OBLIGATION OBLIGATION/ ADVISABILITY WISH COMMAND

175 106 63

44.3 26.84 15.95

4

1.01

4

1.01

12 24

3.04 6.08

7

TOTALS

380

15

3.4

96.2

TOTAL TOTAL CASES % 179 106 67

45.32 26.83 16.96

1.77

19 24

4.81 6.08

3.8

395

100

Juxtaposition

Juxtaposing the results of the description(s) done on comparable data will bring to light possible correspondences, divergences and, most important, “blanks” or gaps in each language. This stage encompasses both qualitative and quantitative information. A follow-up of the descriptive data offered above produces the data displayed in Table 4. According to our empirical data both formal resources can convey two of the functions identified by the meaning labels ‘obligation’ and ‘passive obligation’, while all the other values result in interlanguage gaps; only the English means can convey ‘confident inference’4 and only the Spanish periphrasis can express ‘obligation/advisability’, ‘wish’ or ‘command’.

 Rosa Rabadán

Table 4. Juxtaposition MUST/DEBER + INF MUST % 30.51 44.62 24.87

MEANINGS PASSIVE OBLIGATION OBLIGATION CONFIDENT INFERENCE OBLIGATION/ADVISABILITY WISH COMMAND

100.00

TOTAL

DEBER+INF % 45.32 26.83 16.96 4.81 6.08 100.00

What follows from this finding is another working hypothesis: obtaining gaps in our particular area does not mean that this particular meaning does not obtain in the language; it merely indicates that it is conveyed by expressive means different from those perceived as being similar. The dissimilar fillers for these gaps will be provided by parallel corpus ACTRES. Because of our final goal, directionality applies, and for the time being we will only be concerned with gaps obtaining in the target language, i.e., Spanish.

4. DTS: Finding evidence from parallel corpora: The ACTRES parallel corpus. Using a parallel corpus is standard practice in DTS when the research questions are geared towards describing a set of (historically and socially-determined) translation practices or finding high-level regularities, so-called translation universals (Toury 2004). It is common, however, to raise objections to the use of this tool in contrastive analysis (Johansson 2003: 31) on the grounds of the unnaturalness (to say the least) of the language data. But parallel corpora can be profitably used when correctness and language performance evaluation are an issue in the research program. In ACTRES, the parallel corpus plays the key role providing possible fill-in solutions for the gaps identified in the comparable corpus juxtaposition.

4.1

Tools

The ACTRES bilingual parallel corpus has been designed following the selection parameters and distribution of both CREA and The Bank of English. As of January 2005 it contained over 650,000 words roughly equally distributed between the two languages (intended full size 2 million words).5 It can be said that the materials are representative of the same variety and areas of written language as those in the comparable corpora. Newspapers, magazines, books and ephemera/miscellaneous have all found their

Divisions, description and applications 

way into this tool, as shown in Table 5 below. Textual material dates from 1999 onwards in both languages, English and Spanish. Table 5. Corpora comparability and distribution Bank of English subcorpora

CREA subcorpora

Parallel ACTRES

UK books UK Today UK Times UK Sun UK mags UK ephemera

Libros- España

Books

Periódicos-España

Newspapers

Revistas-España Miscelánea-España

Magazines Miscellaneous

4.2

Selection

The role of the ACTRES parallel corpus is to provide fillers for the cross-linguistic gaps and to offer some clue to whether translated and non-translated usage in the target language in the area under study is consistent. To fulfil its role as a provider of diagnostic evidence, a hundred pairs are randomly selected for each new problem to be analyzed. The selection of querying items does not present any problem as they are obviously those chosen for searching the original English corpus.

4.3

Description

At this stage the qualitative evidence indicates the formally dissimilar possibilities that have been established as translation solutions for the ST problem, i.e. the gap fillers. Quantitatively, the results point towards the formal regularities/preferences in translation behaviour for the materials in our corpus (Figure 1). The translators’ choices reflect the degree of formal dispersion of this semantic area in Spanish. Whereas the periphrastic constructions deber + inf (must), tener que + inf (have to) and deber de + inf (must) can be considered the more central forms, with the first option as the core resource, the middle of the cline is occupied by the conditional tense, a number of adjectival/adverbial constructions which result from modulation/transposition processes, the imperative, need/be necessary combinations and the lexical verbs conjugated in the appropriate tense. The repertoire also includes a peripheral group of periphrastic items (haber de, haber que) and options such as the future tense, querer and poder.

 Rosa Rabadán 60 50

48

40 30 20

14

13

10 0

a b c d e f g

a

b

c

4

4

3

3

3

2

2

2

1

1

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

k

l

m

deber + inf (must ) Tener que + inf (have to) deber de + inf (must) modulation/transposition conditional tense imperative verb in corresponding tense

h i j k l m

necesitar (need/be necessary) haber de + inf (must) querer + inf (want/wish + inf) poder + inf (can/possibly) future haber que + inf (have to)

Figure 1. ACTRES 100 pairs. Spanish formal translation solutions to English must

4.4

Juxtaposition

The juxtaposition of parallel corpus data will yield the distribution of meaning functions according to formal resource. It will also reveal whether there exist consistent regularities in translated uses in Spanish. Table 6 displays the quantitative and qualitative values for the translation solutions for must. The most frequent translation solutions for must-obligation and must-passive obligation are deber + inf (must) and tener que + inf (have to), but no distinctive form-function specialization can be put forward in terms of translational behaviour. Less central options include necesitar/ser necesario + inf (need/be necessary) for ‘obligation’ as well as modulation/transposition processes and mood markers (subjunctive, imperative) that occasionally change the meaning in the translated text (e.g. 47 <We need to get this over with. I must see you today.// Tenemos que resolver este asunto cuanto antes. Quisiera verlo hoy mismo.>). Deber de+ inf (must) emerges as the Spanish central resource to express ‘confident inference’. Other (more peripheral) solutions recorded in our sample are deber + inf (must) and poder + inf/posiblemente + conjugated verb (can/possibly). The latter generally lends a pragmatic shift towards ‘tentative inference’ (e.g. 6 < Like today’s common chimps and bonobos, our first forebears must have lived in communities, often consisting of eighty to a hundred males and females.// Al igual que los chimpancés comunes y los bonobos, nuestros primeros ancestros posiblemente vivían en comunidades compuestas por un número de machos y hembras que podía variar entre dieciocho y cien.>).

Divisions, description and applications 

But perhaps the most promising contribution of this part of the analysis to our application-oriented procedure is that it clearly highlights the different grammatical capabilities and pragmatic divergences of the two languages and the solutions available for dealing with them. Just as the degree of redundancy, cross-linguistic transfer or misassociation seems to be particularly abundant in our materials, the challenge at this point is to perform a diagnostic check on the meaning of the translated texts to help clarify the options before moving on to the next stage. Table 6. ACTRES 100 pairs. Meaning-form distribution of Spanish translation solutions MEANING

%

Passive Obligation

23

Obligation

48

Confident inference

29

TOTALS

100

TRANSLATION SOLUTIONS

%

Deber + inf (must) Tener que + inf (have to) Imperativo (imperative) Haber de + inf (have to ) Verb in corresponding tense Haber que + inf (have to) Deber + inf (must) Tener que + inf (have to) Necesitar/ser necesario + inf (need/be necessary) Modulation/transposition Querer + inf (want/wish+ inf; ind/subj. mood) Imperativo (imperative) Deber de+ inf (must) Condicional (conditional tense) Deber + inf (must) Tener que + inf (have to) Verb in corresponding tense Poder/es posible que + inf (can/be posible that + inf) Modulation/transposition Futuro (simple future)

15 2 2 2 1 1 29 10 3 3 2 1 13 4 4 2 2 2 1 1

TOTALS

100

5. Contrast of comparable and translated English-Spanish data The contrast phase tends to become blurred with the ‘verification of target language fit’, and may be taken as a kind of superjuxtaposition before checking the degree of overlap between translational and non-translational uses. It will yield the complete picture of the actual meaning capabilities of the chosen resource in the target language, including

 Rosa Rabadán

gaps. To reach this stage with substantial information it is advisable to have completed the description and juxtaposition stages of as many problem items in the semantic field as possible (in our case should, have to, haber de + inf, tener que + inf among others). The contrast is used here in a utilitarian way, different from what would be expected in straight contrastive linguistics; results are applicable as long as the significance of the data is in direct relationship to the qualitative gaps and/or the statistical divergences. Other findings, which are obviously important from a strictly linguistic point of view, are not taken into consideration. Table 7 highlights the match and/or deviations between the data obtained at the comparable corpus stage and those yielded by the analysis of the parallel corpus for deber + inf.. Table 7. Semantic distribution of comparable and translated data: Deber + inf MUST % 30.51 44.62 24.87

DEBER +INF % 45.32 26.83 16.96 4.81 6.08

100

100

FUNCTIONS

TRANSLATED DEBER +INF %

Passive obligation Obligation Confident inference Obligation/advisability Wish Command

15 29 4

TOTALS

48

The data contributed by this part provide a wealth of information: Only 48% of the translated cases use the similarly perceived resource, which means the formally dissimilar options tend to be preferred for certain meaning functions. ‘Obligation’ cases show a high degree of homogeneity and, although there are other options available (tener que + inf, necesitar among others), there are no divergences worth noting in the centrality of deber + inf both in original Spanish and in translation. There are, however, noticeable differences in the ‘passive obligation’ area, where the use of deber + inf in translation drops substantially in favour of alternative resources (see Table 6). ‘Confident inference’, which had been identified as a gap, is occasionally conveyed by deber + inf, an option which is not recorded in the original Spanish data (see Note 3). According to the diagnostic data (Table 6), the overwhelming translation solution for this function is deber de +inf, which seems to indicate an adherence to the Spanish normative use in this area. Other gaps shown in Table 7 do not concern the direction of our analysis and are, therefore, omitted from the contrast.

Divisions, description and applications 

6. Verifying the target language fit and building the inventory of descriptively correct possibilities This stage, which to some extent overlaps with the previous contrast phase, aims at checking the match/overlap between translation solutions unveiled by descriptive data extracted from parallel ACTRES and the corresponding non-translational uses obtained from the CREA comparable part so as to build up an inventory of “descriptively correct possibilities”. As reported by Bowker (1998), monolingual corpora used separately and independently seem to have a positive effect on the overall quality of the translation, although the assumed beneficial effect on the use of target grammar and/ or register has not yet been demonstrated. When used as part of a broader procedure, as here, a monolingual TL corpus provides an adequate tool for the verification of the target language fit (Chesterman 2004: 6). Table 8. Towards an inventory of “descriptively correct solutions” for translating English must into Spanish PROBLEM

MEANINGS

Passive obligation

M U S T

SOLUTIONS Deber + inf (must) Tener que + inf (have to) Imperative (imperativo) Verb in corresponding tense Haber de + inf (have to) Haber que + inf (must)

Obligation

Deber + inf (must) Tener que + inf (have to) Modulation/transposition Necesitar/ser necesario + inf (need/be necessary) Querer + inf (want/wish +inf) Imperative

Confident inference

Deber de+ inf (must) Deber + inf (must) Condicional (conditional tense) Tener que + inf (have to) Verb in corresponding tense Poder/es posible que + inf (can/ be possible that + inf) Modulation/transposition Future

 Rosa Rabadán

For the English-Spanish pair it can be said that, with the exception of certain areas, the qualitative data tend to show a reasonable degree of correspondence. There seem to be, however, significant quantitative mismatches (Table 7) in the functions analyzed so far, although large-scale verification is still called for. The final goal will be attained once we are in a position to formulate an inventory of translation possibilities obtained from mapping the results of the contrastive and descriptive stages onto the “reality” provided by CREA, the monolingual target language corpus. The use of empirical data also contributes the necessary prescriptive outlook which ensures that non-validated options (i.e. forms that do not actually express the meaning put forward by the original text) are not included in the final inventory (shadowed items in Table 8). This list of “descriptively correct solutions” will present different information levels, from qualitative data to frequency rates and/or preferential choices according to contextual parameters, such as register, text function, etc. Their applicability range is wide and ranges from providing a tertium comparationis for the interpretation of translational shifts, to the formulation of instructionlike multiple choice translational options (based on description) to be used by researchers, translators and those involved in translation training.

7. Conclusion It was my hypothesis at the beginning that there are directions generally adopted by the TS research community that have not been sufficiently pursued for a number of reasons (not least that applied TS researchers still hold the stigma of the old prescriptive ways). One of these directions is application building. Applications cannot be built directly from descriptive-explanatory work, nor can they be derived directly from those data by their final users. Notwithstanding, constructing them is also part of the research process. In this paper I have outlined a procedure for eliciting descriptive data geared towards applied purposes. In so doing I have illustrated how regular descriptive work in translation, contrastive linguistic analysis and corpus linguistics can be successfully combined in order to obtain findings on which to build future applications. To attain this new goal, it is vital to achieve the “right” combination of aspects from different research directions in order to focus on research goals different from those typical of each of the directions taken separately. It is also important to be flexible about the use of otherwise well-established concepts in the new research environment and to make sure that these new uses of the concepts and procedures meet the demands of our purpose.

Divisions, description and applications 

Notes * Research for this paper has been undertaken as part of project BFF2001-0112 funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (MCyT). I wish to thank Roda P. Roberts and an anonymous reviewer for their insightful comments on this paper. 1. The acronym stands for Análisis contrastivo y traducción inglés-español (Contrastive Analysis and Translation English-Spanish). 2. Semantic labels here can be seen as a kind of culturally and language-bound relative category. It is understood that these labels are relative, and that cross-language labelling can also be dependent on directionality. See Rosch (1975). 3.

The original formula is n=

results in n=

N (N-1)E2+1

(zα/2)2Npq (N-1)×E2+(zα/2)2pq

(Santos Peñas et al. 2003:87-90), which

when a confidence interval of 95% is applied and therefore zα/2=1,96.

The value for p and therefore for q is 0,5 (p=q=0,5) . If a different confidence interval is taken, the value for p (and q) will differ as well. 4. Although deber + inf is sometimes used instead of the normative deber de + inf to convey this function, no example of this (mainly oral) use has been recorded in the Spanish (written) language sample. On the interchangeability of these two forms, see Gómez Torrego (1999: 3348–3352). 5. At the time of going to press (October 2005) the corpus contains over 1,850,000 words. Data in the article refer to the earlier situation. Access to the ACTRES corpus is restricted to team researchers because of copyright regulations concerning the texts. A sample of materials can be accessed at http://helmer.hit.uib.no/~knut/noelia.

References Baker, Mona. 1995. “Corpora in Translation Studies: An overview and some suggestions for future research”. Target 7 (2): 223–243. Bondarko, Aleksander. 1991. Functional Grammar. A Field Approach. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Russian original, 1984] Bowker, Lynne. 1998. “Using specialized monolingual native-language corpora as a translation resource: A pilot study”. Meta 43 (4): 631–651. Chesterman, Andrew. 1998. Contrastive Functional Analysis. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Chesterman, Andrew. 2004. “Hypotheses about translation universals”. In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær and D. Gile (eds), 1–14. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Gómez Torrego, Leonardo. 1999. “Los verbos auxiliaries. Las perífrasis verbales de infinitivo”. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Vol. 2, I. Bosque and V. Demonte (coords), 3323–3390. Madrid: Espasa.

 Rosa Rabadán Granger, Sylvianne. 2003. “The corpus approach: a common way forward for Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies?”. In Corpus-Based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, S. Granger, J. Lerot and S. Petch-Tyson (eds), 17–30. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Halverson, Sandra. 1998. “Translation Studies and representative corpora: establishing links between translation corpora, theoretical/descriptive categories and a conception of the object of study”. Meta 43 (4): 494–514. Ivir, Vladimir. 1981. “Formal correspondence vs. translation equivalence”. Poetics Today 2 (4): 51–59. Johansson, Stig. 2003. “Contrastive linguistics and corpora”. In Corpus-Based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies, S. Granger, J. Lerot and S. Petch-Tyson (eds), 31–44. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi. Krzeszowski, Tomasz. 1990. Contrasting Languages. The Scope of Contrastive Linguistics. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Labrador de la Cruz, Belén. 2004. “A methodological proposal for the study of semantic functions across languages”. Meta 49 (2): 360–380. Rabadán, Rosa. In press. “Translating the “predictive” and “hypothetical” meanings EnglishSpanish”. Meta. Rabadán, Rosa, Labrador, Belén and Ramón García, Noelia. 2004. “English-Spanish corpusbased contrastive analysis: translational applications from the ACTRES project”. In Practical Applications in Language Corpora (PALC 2003), B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed.), 141–152. Hamburg: Lang. Ramón García, Noelia. 2002. “Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies interconnected”. Linguistica Antverpiensia 1: 393–406. Rosch, Eleanor H. 1975. “Universals and cultural specifics in human categorization”. In Crosscultural Perspectives on Learning. R. W. Brislin, S. Bochner and W. J. Lonner (eds), 177–206. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Santos Peñas, Julián, Muñoz Alamillos, A., Juez Martel, P. and Vázquez Cortiñas, P. 2003. Diseño de encuestas para estudios de mercado. Técnicas de muestreo y análisis multivariante. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces. Taylor, John. 2003. Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Toury, Gideon. 2004. “Probabilistic explanations in Translation Studies: Universals – or a challenge to the very concept?” In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær and D. Gile (eds), 15–26. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Tymoczko, Maria. 1998. “Computerized corpora and the future of Translation Studies”. Meta 43 (4): 653–659. Willems, Dominique, Defrancq, Bart, Colleman, Timothy and Noël, Dirk. 2004. Contrastive Analysis in Language. Identifying Linguistic Units of Comparison. Basingstoke, UK/NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

A clivagem no português Critérios de classificação e métodos de tradução Tinka Reichmann University of Saarland, Germany

This paper describes the different clefting structures in Portuguese as a means of conveying the focus-ground structure of texts. Clefting is used to mark the text with the sender perspective. The broad variety of cleft sentences in Portuguese is connected to a complex variety of functions, and thus confronts the translator with the challenge of translating them into other languages such as German, a language which does not have this structural variety owing to its relatively free word order. Some possible translation methods based on the functions of cleft sentences are presented and illustrated.

Keywords: cleft sentences, contrastive analysis, focus, functionalism, translation methods

1. Introdução Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar as diferentes estruturas de clivagem no Português (construções clivadas, pseudo-clivadas e pseudo-clivadas invertidas) com o fim de analisar a interação entre estas formas gramaticais e as suas respectivas funções comunicativas bem como as suas conseqüências para a estrutura informacional do texto e a tradução. Foi demonstrado em estudos como os realizados por Almeida (2003), Braga (1991, 1994 e 1999), Gil (2002), Kato et al. (1997) e Longhin (1999) que existe uma relação entre as estruturas de clivagem e a estruturação informacional de textos, isto é, entre fenômenos gramaticais e discursivos. A clivagem é um recurso gramatical freqüentemente usado com o fim de focalizar determinados elementos ou informações em textos. A estrutura informacional de um texto é constituída basicamente por elementos focalizados (foco) e não focalizados (fundo); desta maneira, as informações são marcadas pelo autor como mais ou menos

 Tinka Reichmann

importantes, produzindo uma perspectiva informacional do texto. Esta perspectiva exerce um papel fundamental no processo tradutório, pois é parte integrante do textofonte que revela a perspectiva do emissor. Alguns aspectos fundamentais da articulação foco-fundo serão mencionados no item 1. O item 2 concentrar-se-á numa breve descrição e classificação da clivagem no Português, porém sem pretender apresentar um estudo exaustivo. No item 3 serão comentados alguns aspectos relevantes para a tradução. Por fim, serão propostos alguns métodos para a tradução das funções da clivagem. O corpus usado para a análise tem uma extensão de 360.000 palavras e é composto por romances brasileiros e portugueses do séc. XX, totalizando 730 ocorrências de clivagem. Um segundo corpus é constituído pelas respectivas traduções para o alemão.1

2. A articulação foco-fundo 2.1

Fundamentos da articulação foco-fundo

O fenômeno lingüístico aqui designado como “articulação foco-fundo” refere-se ao fato de os textos estarem estruturados em idéias principais e secundárias. Portanto, a estrutura informacional de um texto está dividida em diferentes planos. Esta perspectiva informacional (relevo) pode ser imprimida a um texto de duas maneiras: dando ênfase às informações importantes (proeminência ou relevo positivo) ou, alternativamente, marcando as informações menos importantes como secundárias (rebaixamento ou relevo negativo) (Hartmann 1984: 306; Travaglia 1999: 77s.). A pesquisa nas áreas da Lingüística Cognitiva e da Lingüística da Gestalt demonstram que a percepção humana está baseada nos princípios gerais da Gestalt, dos quais o mais importante é justamente o contraste entre figura e fundo (Travaglia 1999: 79). Em outras palavras, há elementos que são percebidos com mais intensidade pelo ser humano do que outros. Estes elementos privilegiados formam a figura; os restantes, o fundo (Langhoff 1980: 19). Há muitos fatores que influem na diferenciação entre figura e fundo, tanto a nível formal (informações ressaltadas pelo autor, etc.) como informal (interesse do ouvinte, circunstâncias externas, etc.). Os elementos que não fazem parte da figura formam o fundo, sendo que este pode ser constituído por elementos muito heterogêneos. Em casos nos quais as condições da Gestalt não estão claramente delimitadas, pode ocorrer o fenômeno da reversão, ao qual se recorre freqüentemente nas ilusões óticas. Nestes casos, os elementos da figura e do fundo podem ser conscientemente invertidos pelo receptor. É preciso ressaltar que a figura só existe devido ao seu contraste com o fundo; não há, portanto, figuras ou fundos isolados. O fundo, por sua vez, pode ser definido negativamente como tudo aquilo que não faz parte da figura (Langhoff 1980: 19s.). Transportando este princípio da percepção humana para a linguagem, constatamos que os textos também estão divididos em informações de diferentes níveis, tal como foi descrito acima.

A clivagem no português 

A título de ilustração, Gonçalves, para descrever o fenômeno da focalização, remete à metáfora da iluminação teatral com refletores direcionais que podem mover-se e iluminar uma determinada cena no palco. A parte iluminada corresponde ao(s) elemento(s) focalizado(s) e o resto do palco não iluminado constitui o fundo (Gonçalves 1997: 110s.) Em diferentes trabalhos da Lingüística Textual, o termo “focalização“ é freqüentemente usado para descrever ou a perspectiva que o autor tende a imprimir ao texto ou então a interpretação a partir da ótica do leitor. Gonçalves distancia-se do uso genérico deste termo, definindo focalização da seguinte maneira: Neste trabalho, diferentemente, entendo por Focalização “o ato de focalizar, ou seja, de acentuar, de ressaltar, de pôr em relevo/ realce/ evidência um determinado item do texto”, seja com o uso de estratégias propriamente textuais, como a topicalização e a clivagem de sentenças, seja por meio de expedientes prosódicos, como a Entonação, seja com atuação concomitante dos dois. (Gonçalves 1997: 110)

Foi necessário introduzir um termo que descreva a interação entre fenômenos de focalização stricto sensu (relevo positivo) e de relevo negativo, ou seja, a perspectiva informacional do texto. Optamos pelo termo “articulação foco-fundo“.

2.2

Articulações foco-fundo, tópico-comentário, tema-rema

A área de pesquisa da estruturação informacional de textos é muito vasta e não poderá ser abordada a fundo neste trabalho. Porém, um modelo que visa estabelecer um sistema abrangente e coerente da estruturação informacional de textos será destacado, pois fornece uma contribuição importante para a definição e a diferenciação dos termos mencionados neste item. A autora, Molnár, parte da classificação de Karl Bühler de 1934 que define três funções da linguagem (representação, apelo e expressão) e as relaciona com os três recursos de estruturação informacional da seguinte maneira: Função da linguagem 1. Representação 2. Apelo 3. Expressão

Característica

Tipo de estruturação informacional

(centrado no objeto) → Articulação tópico-comentário (centrado no receptor) → Articulação tema-rema (centrado no emissor) → Articulação foco-fundo

(Molnár 1993: 164)2

É preciso ter em mente que este modelo teórico apresenta limitações ao ser aplicado na prática, uma vez que nem sempre é possível traçar um limite claro entre os três tipos de articulação informacional. Porém, a classificação de Molnár parece-me demonstrar de forma convincente que a articulação foco-fundo se refere à perspectiva informacional que o autor confere ao texto e não “à direção de leitura que o (...) leitor imprime ao texto” (Gonçalves 1997: 110). Portanto, a articulação foco-fundo é um sinal claro para

 Tinka Reichmann

o tradutor de que esta perspectiva é parte integrante do texto-fonte, e cabe a ele considerá-la no processo tradutório.

3. A clivagem no Português 3.1

Clivagem

Em termos gerais, a clivagem é um recurso gramatical que “desdobra o enunciado em duas partes“ (Koch 2000: 141) usado, sobretudo, para a focalização de determinados elementos de textos: “Por orações clivadas entendemos um conjunto de construções-Q usadas para salientar um constituinte sintaticamente como foco sentencial. Dizemos sintaticamente porque o foco é, por definição (cf. Chomsky, 1971) o elemento prosodicamente saliente na sentença.“ (Kato et al. 1997: 308). No Português, em especial, a clivagem é um recurso lingüístico importante e usado com muita freqüência em comparação com outros idiomas. Além disso, a variedade de diferentes formas de clivagem no Português é bastante grande, por exemplo em relação à língua alemã. A definição de clivagem mais adequada para o tipo de análise realizado é uma definição funcionalista de Longhin: A clivagem (cleft, no inglês), como o próprio nome sugere, é a segmentação da oração em duas partes, uma não focal e outra focal. Esta segmentação é feita pelo acréscimo do verbo ser e/ou que(m), e constitui (...) um meio de separar explicitamente elementos oracionais de diferentes níveis de informação. (Longhin 1999: 11, grifo da autora)

Dado que esta definição não abrange alguns casos específicos de clivagem constatados no corpus analisado, como a focalização de sentenças inteiras e o uso de construções infinitivas, a definição foi complementada como segue: A clivagem é a segmentação da oração em duas partes, sendo geralmente uma focal e uma não focal. Esta segmentação é feita pelo acréscimo do verbo ser e/ou que e/ou construção infinitiva e/ou pronome relativo, e constitui (...) um meio de separar explicitamente elementos oracionais de diferentes níveis de informação ou de focalizar sentenças inteiras. (grifo nosso)

A fim de introduzir um sistema abrangente de classificação das frases clivadas, serão utilizados dois critérios descritos a seguir, para depois apresentar a proposta de classificação das frases clivadas no Português.

3.2

Critérios de classificação

O primeiro critério usado para diferenciar as diferentes formas de clivagem no Português é a gramaticalização. Através do processo de gramaticalização, uma estrutura le-

A clivagem no português 

xical pode ir assumindo uma função gramatical ou pode tornar-se um morfema preso (prefixo ou sufixo). Uma unidade gramatical também pode, através da gramaticalização, tornar-se uma unidade com maior função gramatical. Ou ainda, uma palavra plena com significado concreto pode transformar-se numa unidade dependente com significado gramatical-relacional. A gramaticalização acontece no nível de langue e tem como resultado a modificação do objeto gramaticalizado e do sistema lingüístico global. Em termos gerais, quanto maior o grau de gramaticalização, mais rígida é a estrutura formal e mais amplo é o seu uso dentro da linguagem, entre outros devido à transformação gradual de conteúdo semântico (Cuenca/Hilferty 1999: 157). Entendo por gramaticalização o trajeto empreendido por um item lexical, ao longo do qual ele muda de categoria sintática (=recategorização), recebe propriedades funcionais na sentença, sofre alterações morfológicas, fonológicas e semânticas, deixa de ser uma forma livre, estágio em que pode até mesmo desaparecer, como conseqüência de uma cristalização extrema. (Castilho 1997: 31)

Um exemplo para ilustrar o resultado de um processo de gramaticalização é a locução “é que” no Português, em que o verbo “ser” e o complementador “que” estão gramaticalmente fixados a ponto de esta locução ser definida como partícula de realce invariável em muitas obras: “Recorde-se que a expressão enfática é que permanece invariável, isto é, não está sujeita às regras de concordância“ (Souza e Silva/Koch 1993: 84). Deve ser mencionado, porém, que a locução “é que” é o estágio mais avançado de gramaticalização, existindo ainda casos em que o verbo “ser” pode estar conjugado no passado (“era que”, “foi que”) e no futuro (“será que”). A diferenciação entre formas com diferentes níveis de gramaticalização é fundamental para a classificação das clivadas porque estas também apresentam diferentes funções comunicativas. Isto será demonstrado nos dois próximos exemplos em perguntas no passado, sendo que em um deles a locução “é que” apresenta o verbo “ser” no presente (“é que”) e no outro, no passado (“foi que”). Isto ilustra que estruturas com diferentes graus de gramaticalização podem coexistir.

(1) Aqui estou eu, caído no fundo de um buraco úmido, cheio de espinhos e de vegetação agressiva, virado de barriga para cima, imóvel como um faquir em jejum. (...). Tenho a impressão clara de que estou perdido. Tudo bem: vamos dar um jeito de sair deste buraco. Como é que fui cair aqui dentro?3

Neste primeiro exemplo, verifica-se que a expressão “é que” realmente atua como partícula de realce invariável. É a forma mais gramaticalizada da locução, pois apesar de a pergunta estar no passado, o verbo “ser” está conjugado no presente. Não há, portanto, congruência entre o foco e o verbo copulativo. Em termos comunicativos, a locução “é que” não focaliza o pronome interrogativo “como”, mas sim o conteúdo da pergunta em si (o fato estranho de ter caído naquele buraco), levando à focalização da pergunta como um todo.

 Tinka Reichmann

(2) – Ei, cara, foi você que caiu lá de cima? Cadê a asa? Ah, sim. Acabam de me fazer uma pergunta. (...) Abro e fecho várias vezes os olhos e consigo descobrir que tenho à minha frente – e ao alto – um valoroso bombeiro. – Não – consigo dizer. – Não fui eu que caí, não. – Então quem foi que caiu? – Foi um amigo meu. Que eu vim salvar.4 Já neste segundo exemplo, o verbo “ser” está conjugado no passado, apresentando desta maneira congruência com o foco. Neste caso, a locução – que apresenta um menor grau de gramaticalização que a do exemplo anterior (1) – focaliza o pronome interrogativo “quem” e não a pergunta inteira. Estes dois exemplos demonstram que um tipo de clivada pode ser analisada mais a fundo com o critério da gramaticalização, que permite identificar diferentes funções. O critério da gramaticalização permite diferenciar entre variedades com e sem congruência do verbo “ser”. Porém, este critério não permite uma classificação das formas de clivagem que supere a dicotomia de clivagem à direita e à esquerda do verbo da frase-complemento. Por tal motivo, o critério da conectividade (Grewendorf/Poletto 1991: 180ss.) foi aplicado como segundo critério de diferenciação para poder estabelecer um sistema de classificação abrangente das formas de clivagem no Português. Em relação às frases clivadas, a conectividade focal expressa-se através de uma estreita relação entre o foco e a frase-complemento (Gil 2004: 371). O complementador “que” perdeu suas características de pronome relativo ao longo do processo de gramaticalização, o que pode ser comprovado pela função de sujeito da frase-complemento, como nos exemplos a seguir. O primeiro exemplo com o pronome relativo “quem”, ainda não gramaticalizado, ilustra a diferença:

(3) Foi o próprio Bush quem reconheceu que enviaram correspondência para a Casa Branca infectada com anthrax.5

A estrutura básica desta frase é “foi X quem fez Y”. A inversão desta estrutura é possível: “quem fez Y foi X”. No caso da inversão, a frase com o pronome “quem” torna-se sujeito, o que demonstra que é composta por duas orações relativamente independentes entre as quais não existe uma interligação forte. Dado que não se trata de uma só oração desdobrada em duas partes, esta estrutura é classificada como pseudo-clivada. Porém, no caso do complementador “que”, mais gramaticalizado, a situação é diferente:

(4) Foi o paranaense Adriano Fernandes Ferreira que levantou uma dúvida.6

A estrutura básica desta frase é a mesma do exemplo anterior, com a única diferença de apresentar o complementador “que” no lugar do pronome “quem”: “foi X que fez Y”. A inversão não é possível: *“que fez Y foi X”, sendo que a frase com “que” não pode assumir função de sujeito. Isto demonstra que a estrutura é composta por uma só ora-

A clivagem no português 

ção (no caso, desdobrada em duas partes, ou seja, clivada), pois existe uma interligação interna forte. Esta interligação precisamente caracteriza a conectividade focal. Com base no critério da conectividade focal, a clivagem no Português pode ser classificada em três tipos: Tipo 1. Frase clivada 2. Frase pseudo-clivada 3. Frase pseudo-clivada invertida

3.3

Seqüência

Grau

foco-fundo fundo-foco foco-fundo

alto grau de conectividade focal baixo grau de conectividade focal baixo grau de conectividade focal

Classificação dos tipos de clivagem

Aplicando ambos os critérios da gramaticalização e da conectividade focal descritos no item anterior, a classificação dos tipos de clivagem no Português identificados no corpus é demonstrada na tabela abaixo:7 1. Frase clivada com complementador QUE/a+infinitivo (foco-fundo) CL1 CL2 CL3 CL4 CL5 CL6 CL7

ser_F_que_V (ou: é_F_que_V) F_é que_V F_ser_que_V F_que_V F_ser_que_V? [palavra-Q_é que_V] F?8 ser_F_a_V (infinitivo) 2. Frase pseudo-clivada (fundo-foco) com pronome relativo / clítico e pronome relativo

PS1 PS2 PS3 PS4 PS5

o(s)/a(s) que_V_ ser_F (ou: aquele que_V_ser_F; onde_V_ser_F) quem_V_ser_F V_ser_F V_mas_ser_F É que_V_F (ou: O que é, é que_V_F; O que é_V_F) 3. Frase pseudo-clivada invertida (foco-fundo) com pronome relativo / clítico e pronome relativo

PI1 PI2 PI3 PI4 PI5 PI6 PI7

ser_F_o(s)/a(s) que_V (ou: ser_F_aquele que_V; ser_F_onde_V) ser_F_o que_V (“o“ invariável) ser_F_quem_V ser_F_quem_V (congruência com o foco) F_ser_o(s)/a(s) que_V (ou: F_ser_aquele que_V) F_ser_o que_V (“o“ invariável) F_ser quem_V

 Tinka Reichmann

4. Tradução da clivagem 4.1

Multifuncionalidade da clivagem

A clivagem desempenha uma grande variedade de funções no discurso, tais como: identificação, contraste, exclusividade, justificação, modalidade subjetiva, etc. a nível semântico e, a nível de estruturação informacional: focalização do tema, do rema, inversão da seqüência tema-rema, etc. para citar só algumas (cf. Almeida 2003, Johansson 2002, Longhin 1999, Reichmann 2005). Outros estudos que tratam das funções da clivagem serão somente mencionados, sem porém poderem ser abordados a fundo no presente trabalho: Braga (1991), Declerck (1988), Delahunty (2001), Gärtner (1998), Gil (2002), Helfrich (2003), Hupet & Costermanns (1982), Kato et al. (1997), Modesto (2001), Nølke (1983) e Sedano (1990). A clivagem varia muito em termos de forma, freqüência e função nos diferentes idiomas, o que já foi analisado em alguns estudos contrastivos da clivagem: Königs (1997) e Ahlemeyer & Kohldorf (1999): inglês-alemão, Sedano (2001) e Gil (2002): espanhol-português, Johansson (2002): inglês-sueco, Grewendorf & Poletto (1991): alemão-inglês-italiano. Dado que a clivagem é um instrumento de expressão da perspectiva que o autor imprime ao texto e que demonstra o seu envolvimento na constituição da linguagem, a função realizada através destas estruturas no discurso assume importância fundamental. Por isso, no presente estudo a comparação lingüística é realizada através do termo de comparação da função das respectivas formas de clivagem. No corpus foi analisado se a tradução reproduz a função do original ou não. Na tradução para o alemão deve também ser considerado que a clivagem, apesar de existente, é muito pouco usada nesse idioma e apresenta pouca variedade de formas (Lehmann 1984: 359). A comparação com um corpus de referência alemão demonstrou que a freqüência da clivagem no português é 10 vezes maior (19,3 vs. 1,9 clivagens por 10.000 palavras)9 e que a clivagem mais freqüente no alemão é a frase pseudo-clivada invertida (46 %). No corpus analisado, das 730 estruturas de clivagem do original, somente 80 (ou seja 11 %) foram traduzidas com uma estrutura de clivagem no alemão, o que corresponde aproximadamente à proporção de freqüência entre o português e o alemão de 10: 1. Portanto, as convenções em termos de freqüência de clivagem foram devidamente consideradas na tradução.

4.2

Métodos de tradução da clivagem segundo a função

Na análise realizada, porém, 27 % das estruturas de clivagem não reproduziram, na tradução, a função da clivagem. Estes resultados permitem formular hipóteses que ainda deverão ser verificadas em estudos posteriores. Uma delas é que as funções não são devidamente reconhecidas pelo tradutor. De qualquer maneira, os resultados demonstram que a clivagem representa um grande desafio para a tradução devido à sua complexidade formal e funcional, como pode ser ilustrado no seguinte exemplo:

A clivagem no português 

(5a) – Vai ver se a porta grande não está aberta, dali a gente atravessa e entra no quintal. – Eu não. Se eu entrar lá, vão dizer que eu sou neguinho ladrão, eu mesmo que não vou lá.10 (CL4) (5b) «Sieh doch mal, ob die große Tür offen ist, dann können wir durch das Magazin in den Hof. » «Ich nicht. Wenn ich da reingehe, dann sagen die, ich wäre ein Negerdieb, nein, ich nicht.»11 Neste diálogo é expressada a função semântica de exaustividade do elemento focalizado (eu) que ao mesmo tempo introduz um tema acentuado no início da frase. Na tradução não foram reproduzidas as funções do original: “ich nicht” (eu não) não contém o mesmo valor semântico e informacional que “eu mesmo que não vou”. Houve portanto uma perda a nível da articulação foco-fundo. Haveria, porém, as seguintes possibilidades de tradução: “ich doch nicht” (introdução da partícula focalizadora doch) ou “ich gehe auf keinen Fall rein“ (paráfrase: “não entro de jeito nenhum“). A título de ilustração serão apresentadas a seguir algumas estratégias mais freqüentes de tradução da clivagem para o alemão com exemplos do corpus analisado: Posição inicial: (6a) - Foi só em 1910 – prosseguiu José Lírio – no tempo da campanha civilista, que voltei ao Sobrado, graças ao Rodrigo.12 (CL1) (6b) „Erst im Jahre 1910“, erzählte José Lírio weiter, „nach den damaligen politischen Wirren durfte ich wieder in den Sobrado zurückkehren, und das hab ich Rodrigo zu verdanken. (...)”13 Neste exemplo, a clivagem ressalta a locução adverbial de tempo e inverte a seqüência tema-rema ao posicionar o rema antes do tema a nível de estruturação, o que provoca uma focalização do rema.14 A posição inicial do elemento focalizado no alemão é adequada para expressar a focalização do rema, tal como no original. No alemão não se faz necessário recorrer a uma clivagem, pois também deve ser considerado que a convenção no alemão é uma freqüência baixa de clivagem e um número maior de outros mecanismos de focalização. Partícula focalizadora: (7a) (...) ali se diz mui explicadamente que os cruzados auxiliarão os portugueses a tomar Lisboa, e a prova de que assim foi que aconteceu iríamos encontrá-la nas páginas seguintes, lá onde se descreve o cerco, o assalto às muralhas, o combate nas ruas e nas casas (...).15 (CL3) (7b) (...) da steht ausdrücklich zu lesen, daß die Kreuzritter den Portugiesen bei der Einnahme Lissabons helfen werden, und den Beweis, daß dies denn auch tatsächlich geschah, würden wir auf den folgenden Seiten finden, wo die Bela-

 Tinka Reichmann

gerung beschrieben wird, die Überwindung der Mauern, der Kampf in den Straßen und in den Häusern (...).16 Outra possibilidade de reproduzir a função da clivagem na tradução, já mencionada no exemplo (5), é a inclusão de uma partícula focalizadora (ou várias), o que foi realizado no presente exemplo. No original a clivagem assume a função de marcar a exaustividade e introduz um tema acentuado no início da oração “assim foi que aconteceu” a nível de estruturação informacional. Na tradução, a focalização não é realizada através de clivagem, mas através dos elementos denn auch tatsächlich. Paráfrase/explicitação: (8a) Cuca estava desapontado. Como era que ele não sabia ainda daquela novidade? Esmeralda tinha ganho a parada, podia arrastar as fichas – concluiu com relutância.17 (CL5) (8b) Cuca Lopes war nicht wenig verblüfft. Wie war es möglich, daß er davon noch gar nicht wußte? Esmeralda hatte diesmal das Spiel gewonnen, folgerte er widerstrebend.18 Nesta pergunta, a clivagem expressa o questionamento do personagem em relação à sua própria falta de informação. Esta função foi reproduzida de maneira adequada no alemão ao verbalizar este questionamento com a paráfrase “como era possível que”. A clivagem também focaliza o rema, ou seja a informação para a qual está direcionada a pergunta “como...?”, porém sem esperar uma resposta, dado que se trata de uma pergunta retórica. Sendo que não existe uma clivada adequada e funcionalmente equivalente no alemão, é necessário recorrer à explicitação lexical, o que também já foi ilustrado no exemplo (5). Pseudo-clivada invertida: (9a) [Ele] nunca mais a viu. As pessoas vinham e logo desapareciam – que é que delas se poderia reter? Ou era ele que, quando os outros se lhe ofereciam, se via incapaz de retribuir?19 CL1 (9b) Er sah sie niemals wieder. Die Menschen kamen und verschwanden gleich wieder – was hätte von ihnen zurückbleiben können? Oder war er es, der, wenn die anderen sich ihm preisgaben, Angst hatte, sich ihnen dafür vertrauensvoll auszuliefern?20 Aqui é expressada a função semântica de contraste (as pessoas/ele) e é focalizado o tema (ele) a nível de estruturação informacional. No alemão, a frase pseudo-clivada invertida é um instrumento adequado para focalizar o tema porque a posição de um elemento no início da frase implica uma focalização do mesmo. O tradução também expressa contraste. No alemão, são focalizados quase que exclusivamente elementos não-modais, sendo que as pseudo-clivadas invertidas são as mais freqüentes em alemão (46%).

A clivagem no português 

Os exemplos (6)–(9) acima ilustram a variedade das possibilidades de tradução da clivagem para outros idiomas tendo em consideração a sua função no texto-fonte. As estratégias aqui apresentadas para o alemão (posição inicial, partícula(s) focalizadora(s), paráfrase e clivagem) não são exaustivas e podem variar segundo os instrumentos lingüísticos disponíveis no idioma do texto-alvo. Para tanto é imprescindível analisar as características da articulação foco-fundo na respectiva língua-alvo.

5. Conclusão Tendo traçado uma breve caracterização da estruturação informacional de textos e do papel da clivagem no âmbito da articulação foco-fundo, as diferentes estruturas de clivagem no Português foram classificadas a partir dos critérios da gramaticalização e da conectividade focal. Essa classificação procura abranger todas as formas gramaticais de clivagem para permitir um estudo mais abrangente deste fenômeno lingüístico. Foi demonstrado que a clivagem é um meio de estruturação informacional importante que representa a perspectiva que o autor imprime ao texto. A grande variedade de formas gramaticais e funções da clivagem no Português torna-a um fenômeno complexo com uma série de implicações para a tradução. A descrição detalhada das formas e funções da clivagem facilita a análise e a compreensão do texto-fonte e o processo tradutório. Com o critério da função da clivagem podem ser formuladas estratégias concretas para a sua tradução. As funções comunicativas destas estruturas, a comparação lingüística e a análise das dificuldades de reprodução das funções na tradução são alguns temas em que ainda há muito campo para posteriores trabalhos de pesquisa. Outros desideratos nessa vasta área seriam, para mencionar alguns: estudos diacrônicos para analisar a fundo a origem das construções clivadas; estudos contrastivos entre o Português europeu e o Português do Brasil para detectar diferenças a nível de estruturas, freqüência, domínio, etc. da clivagem; análises sobre as diferenças da clivagem em linguagem falada e escrita; estudos sobre as correlações entre determinadas estruturas de clivagem e a focalização de um tipo particular de constituinte, o que explicaria o uso de uma ou outra forma de clivagem em determinados contextos. O presente trabalho pretende dar uma pequena contribuição para essa vasta área de pesquisa.

Notas 1.

Reichmann (2005: 221ss.).

2. Tradução nossa. 3.

Pinto, Ziraldo Alves, 1987, Vito Grandam, p. 10.

4. op. cit., p. 71.

 Tinka Reichmann 5.

Jornal de Notícias, 25.10.2001, http://www.jn.pt.

6. Veja, 25.07.2001, p. 24. 7. V = verbo, F = foco, CL = clivada, PS = pseudo-clivada, PI = pseudo-clivada invertida. Esta tabela é parte integrante da tese de doutorado redigida em alemão (Reichmann 2005: 141). Para facilitar o acesso aos leitores de língua portuguesa, a tabela é reproduzida mais uma vez neste artigo em português. 8. Os parênteses retos pretendem representar que o foco se refere à sentença inteira. 9. Reichmann (2005: 214ss.). 10. Ribeiro, João Ubaldo (1984), Viva o Povo Brasileiro, p. 219. 11. Ribeiro, João Ubaldo (1988), Brasilien, Brasilien. Tradução de Curt Meyer-Clason e Jacob Deutsch, p. 242. 12. Veríssimo, Érico (2000 [1951]), O tempo e o vento – O retrato, p. 44. 13. Veríssimo, Érico (1987 [1955]), Das Bildnis des Rodrigo Cambará. Tradução de Thomas Silbitzer e Ernst Doblhofer, p. 52. 14. Método usado freqüentemente para gerar contraste (Kato et al. 1997: 340). 15. Saramago, José (2001 [1989]), História do Cerco de Lisboa, p. 49. 16. Saramago, José (1995 [1992]), Geschichte der Belagerung von Lissabon. Tradução de Andreas Klotsch, p. 57. 17. Veríssimo, Érico, op. cit., p. 15. 18. Veríssimo, Érico, op cit., p. 20. 19. Namora, Fernando (1981 [1957]), O Homem Disfarçado. Rio de Janeiro, p. 268. 20. Namora, Fernando (1974), Der Mann mit der Maske. Berlin. Tradução de Lieselotte Kolanoske, p. 281.

Bibliografia Ahlemeyer, Birgit and Kohlhof, Inga 1999. “Bridging the Cleft – An analysis of the translation of English it-clefts into German“. Languages in Contrast 2(1): 1–25. Almeida, Manoel de Carvalho. 2003. A multifuncionalidade da clivagem na fala e na escrita. Tese de Doutorado em Lingüística. Rio de Janeiro: UFF. Braga, Maria L. 1991. “As sentenças clivadas no português falado no Rio de Janeiro“. Organon 18: 109–125. Braga, Maria L. 1994. “A dimensão dos constituintes no português do Brasil“. In Linguagem, interação e cognição. Revista Tempo Brasileiro 117, M. C. Mollica and L. P. Moita Lopes (eds), 17–26. Rio de Janeiro. Braga, Maria L. 1999. “Fala, escrita e estratégias de focalização.“ In Descrição do português: abordagens funcionalistas, O. L. A. Campos de Souza (ed.), 281–298. Araraquara: FCL/UNESP Araraquara. Castilho, Ataliba T. de. 1997. “A gramaticalização“. Estudos Lingüísticos e Literários 19: 25–63. Cuenca, María J. and Hilferty, Joseph. 1999. Introducción a la lingüística cognitiva. Barcelona: Ariel.

A clivagem no português 

Declerck, Renaat. 1988. Studies on Copular Sentences, Clefts and Pseudo Clefts. Leuven: Leuven University Press. Delahunty, Gerald P. 2001. “Discourse functions of inferential sentences“. Linguistics 93 (3): 517–545. Berlin: de Gruyter. Gärtner, Eberhard. 1998. Grammatik der portugiesischen Sprache. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Gil, Alberto. 2002. “Grammatikalisierung und Fokusbildung im Portugiesischen und im Spanischen: zu portugiesisch é que, spanisch es que und dem emphatisierenden ser”. In Ex oriente lux, S. Große and A. Schönberger (eds), 207–229. Frankfurt am Main: Valentia. Gil, Alberto. 2004. “Textstrukturelle Dimensionen der Satzspaltung im Italienischen“. In Romanische Sprachwissenschaft, Zeugnisse für Vielfalt und Profil eines Faches, A. Gil, D. Osthus and C. Polzin-Haumann (eds), 369–386. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Gonçalves, Carlos A. V. 1997. Focalização no português do Brasil. Tese de Doutorado em Lingüística. Rio de Janeiro: UFRJ. Grewendorf, Günther and Poletto, Cecilia. 1991. “Die Cleft-Konstruktion im Deutschen, Englischen und Italienischen“. In Strukturen und Merkmale syntaktischer Kategorien, G. Fanselow and S. Felix (eds), 174–216. Tübingen: Narr. Hartmann, Dietrich. 1984. “Reliefgebung: Informationsvordergrund und Informationshintergrund in Texten als Problem von Textlinguistik und Stilistik. Zur Verwendung sprachlicher Mittel zum Ausdruck von Haupt- und Nebeninformation.“ Wirkendes Wort 4/84 (34): 305–323. Helfrich, Uta. 2003. “Hendidas y seudo-hendidas: un análisis empírico-diacrónico“. In Actas del XXIII Congreso Internacional de Lingüística y Filología Románica, Salamanca 2001, F. Sánchez Miret (ed.), Volumen II, primera parte: 439–451. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Hupet, Michel and Costermans, Jean. 1982. “Towards a functional approach of language processing in context“. In Language and comprehension, J.-F. Le Ny and W. Kintsch (eds), 273–284. Amsterdam: North Holland. Johansson, Mats. 2002. Clefts in English and Swedish. A contrastive study of IT-clefts and WH-clefts in original texts and translations. Doctoral dissertation. Lund: Dept. of English, Lund University. Kato, Mary, Braga, Maria L., Reche Corrêa, Vilma, Lopes-Rossi, Maria A. and Sikansi, Nilmara S. (1997). “As construções-Q no português brasileiro falado: perguntas, clivadas e relativas“. In Gramática do Português Falado 6, I. G. V. Koch (ed.), 303–368. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp. Koch, Ingedore G. V. 2000. “Tematização e rematização no português falado no Brasil“. In Estudos de lingüística textual do português, E. Gärtner et al. (eds), 127–148. Frankfurt: TFM. Königs, Karin. 1997. “Zur Übersetzung des englischen cleft sentence ins Deutsche“. Lebende Sprachen 4: 158–165. Berlin: Langenscheidt. Langhoff, Stephan. 1980. Gestaltlinguistik. Eine ganzheitliche Beschreibung syntaktisch semantischer Sprachfunktionen am Beispiel modaler Infinitivkonstruktionen des Deutschen und Englischen. Frankfurt: Lang. Lehmann, Christian. 1984. Der Relativsatz: Typologie seiner Strukturen; Theorie seiner Funktionen; Kompendium seiner Grammatik. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Longhin, Sanderléia Roberta. 1999. As construções clivadas: Uma abordagem diacrônica. Dissertação de Mestrado em Lingüística. Campinas: Unicamp. Modesto, Marcello. 2001. As construções clivadas no português do Brasil: relações entre interpretação focal, movimento sintático e prosódia. São Paulo: Humanitas. Molnár, Valéria. 1993. “Zur Pragmatik und Grammatik des TOPIK-Begriffes“. In Wortstellung und Informationsstruktur, M. Reis, (ed.), 155–202. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Nølke, Henning. 1983. “Quelques réflexions sur la structure sémantique des phrases clivées en français moderne”. Modèles linguistiques V (1): 117–140.

 Tinka Reichmann Reichmann, Tinka. 2005. Satzspaltung und Informationsstruktur im Portugiesischen und im Deutschen – ein Beitrag zur kontrastiven Linguistik und Übersetzungswissenschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Sedano, Mercedes. 1990. Hendidas y otras construcciones con ser en el habla de Caracas. Caracas: Cuadernos del Instituto de Filología “Andés Bello“. Facultad de Humanidades y Educación. Universidad Central de Venezuela. Sedano, Mercedes. 2001. “Estructuras focalizadoras en español y portugués“. Filologia e Lingüística Portuguesa 4: 53–68. São Paulo: Humanitas. Souza e Silva, Maria and Koch, Ingedore G. V. 1993. Lingüística aplicada ao português: sintaxe.

Construals in literary translation Spatial particles and spatial imagery Hanne Jansen University of Copenhagen, Denmark

This paper illustrates how Italian and Danish language users, when coding the same conceived situation involving spatial relations, differ systematically in their way of construing these – as the comparison of examples from Italian and Danish original texts and their translations will show. Structural and normative restrictions (very often related to the use of spatial particles, i.e. prepositions and locative adverbs) give rise, in Danish, to a persistent foregrounding of the spatial and immediately perceivable features of the scene, while in Italian attention seems focused on the interactional relations between the entities. Should the translator adopt or, on the contrary, try to resist the conventional imagery (in this case, +/- spatial) of the target language?

Keywords: spatial particles, imagery, literary translation, grammatical structure, construals

1. Introduction1 One of the most valuable features of literature is its way of creating images, or as the Italian writer and literary scholar Italo Calvino says, its ”power of bringing visions into focus with our eyes shut, of bringing forth forms and colours from the lines of black letters on a white page” (1988: 92). I think it is safe to say that one of the most important tasks of literary translation is to ensure that these images can still be brought into focus in the new text, to recreate the visual aspects of the literary text, that Calvino so emphasizes in his Six Memos for the Next Millennium.2 But which images, which visions does the translator actually make accessible in the new text? In this paper I will concentrate on spatial imagery, i.e. the representation (in our minds and our texts) of the spatial relations between the entities that surround us, or in other

 Hanne Jansen

words, the way in which we capture and code the relations between these entities in terms of distance, proximity, horizontality, verticality, inclusion, exclusion, trajectories etc. Some of the most crucial linguistic devices in evoking spatial imagery – in making the reader of the text perceive the spatial dimension – are the lexical items grouped as prepositions and locative/directional adverbs, lexemes such as, in English, on, in, under, over, up, down, across, between, towards. These will be treated in the present context as a joint class of spatial particles, due to the many characteristics they share, both semantic (being prototypically used to code spatial relations), and syntactic (especially in combining with verbs). In addition, they tend – at least the most frequent ones – to be small in size (particles = “small parts”). All languages seem to include in their repertoire of word classes a class of lexemes (or affixes) dedicated especially to the codification of spatial relations, even if the relations actually coded may differ from language to language. The languages compared in this paper, Italian and Danish, are both Indo-European and both anchored in Western Culture, and they do present many similarities when it comes to spatial particles. Nevertheless, there are differences, both in the options laid down by the language systems, and in the exploitation of these options by the language norms. It is crucially important to be aware of these structural and normative differences when translating between Danish and Italian, as I will try to illustrate by comparing examples from four literary texts in Danish and Italian and their translated counterparts. The differences not only show in the surface of the text (though the frequency of spatial particles in Danish when compared to Italian is impressive), but also have a significant impact on the very mental images construed in the new text. In saying this, I lean on what has been called “one of the more significant hypotheses of Cognitive Linguistics”, that is: [...] that most if not all grammatical categories in fact do have meaning. But the meaning contributed by these categories is conceptual; that is, it represents a way of conceptualizing experience in the process of encoding it and expressing it in language. (Croft 2001: 109)

Or in the terms of R. W. Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar: With respect to a given conceived situation, language users have at their disposal different construals, a term which covers not only “using a given grammatical structure” but also ”understanding the meaning of something” (Tabakowska 1993: 15). As Langacker says, touching on the interlinguistic perspective too: When we use a particular construction or grammatical morpheme, we thereby select a particular image to structure the conceived situation for communicative purposes. Because languages differ in their grammatical structure, they differ in the imagery that speakers employ when conforming to linguistic convention. (Langacker 1991: 12)

Construals in literary translation 

Both the Danish and the Italian translators seem to have opted consistently for solutions that conform to the conventional imagery of the target language – not only when changes are obligatory due to structural restrictions. But in using different construals do the translators not risk “betraying” the original imagery? Do they not, as Venuti (2000) would say, “negate the otherness of the foreign by transmitting it as familiar”? Or is conforming to the conventional imagery the only way to recreate the visual immediacy of the new text?

2. Differences in the coding of spatial imagery I will turn to these questions after the discussion of the examples, a discussion along the lines of what Kirsten Malmkjær defines as Translational Contrastive Linguistics, that is, “using translational data in order to highlight differences between systems in two languages which appear closely related to one another” (Malmkjær 1999: 12). The differences that I want to highlight can be grouped as follows: – differences in the degree of semantic specificity of the spatial particles – differences as to the explicitation of the position of the experiencer of the spatial relation – differences in the topology of the spatial particles, that is their typical position in the sentence – differences in the lexicalisation patterns of movement verbs – differences in the degree of transitivity in a large range of constructions involving physical interaction – and, as a closely related phenomenon, differences as to the so-called position verbs. As translational data I have chosen examples from four contemporary literary texts, two Italian and two Danish, and their translated counterparts.3 With only a few of the many interesting examples found in the texts, I hope to be able to discuss and to illustrate how the differences between the Italian and the Danish construals of scenes involving spatial relations are not only very pervasive, but follow a well-defined pattern, as revealed by the consistency of the translational choices in both directions. The specific lexemes and constructions relating to spatial coding, to which I will refer in the analysis, are marked with bold in the Danish examples (both the original text and the English glosses), and by underlining in the Italian examples (both the original passages and their English glosses). To facilitate the reading of the English glosses, I have refrained from strict literalness in the parts of the text not immediately pertinent to the points to be discussed.

 Hanne Jansen

2.1

The degree of semantic specificity

I will turn first to the differences between Italian and Danish as regards the semantic specificity of the prepositions and the emphasis on the spatial aspect in the Danish language users’ choice of prepositions. In Danish the repertoire itself of spatial particles is more extensive than in Italian, especially the stock of the most frequently used prepositions, which means that they are generally more specific and restricted in their meaning. In examples (1) and (2), we have two constructions in Italian (one in a translation: la neve di Capo Nord, one in an original text: l’orizzonte dell’altipiano) with the very generic Italian preposition di, which hardly entails any of the spatial meaning of its Latin ancestor de. Danish does not have a prepositional counterpart as generic as di, and in fact we find in its place a more specific preposition, emphasizing the spatial and visual aspects of the relation (sneen oppe fra [from] Nordkap and i horisonten bag [behind] højsletten): (1)

(Stangerup p.16/p.29) vide at [...] sneen oppe fra Nordkap snart vil fyge... ‘know that […] the snow up from Nordkap soon will drift…’ sapere che [...] la neve di Capo Nord prenderà presto a turbinare... ‘know that […] the snow of Capo Nord takes soon to whirl…’

(2) (Calvino p.25/p.20) In due modi si raggiunge Despina: per nave o per cammello. [...] Il cammelliere che vede spuntare all’orizzonte dell’altipiano... ‘In two ways you reach Despina: by ship or by camel. […] The camel driver who sees rise at the horizon of the tableland…’ Man kan komme til Despina på to måder, med skib eller på kamel. […] Kameldriveren, der i horisonten bag højsletten ser... ‘You can come to Despina in two ways, with ship or on camel. […] The camel driver, who in the horizon behind the tableland sees…’ We find the same emphasis on the (more immediate) visual perspective in the translation of the Italian prepositions per [by] cammello in (2) and con [with] l’ago (3), rendered in Danish by the clearly more spatial prepositions (på [on] kamel and på [on] nåle). Rather than an increase in semantic specificity, what we see here is a switch from an instrumental relationship to a spatial one, a switch to which I will return below. (3)

(Calvino p.154/p.129) Tra i banconi dove ci si [...] punge con l’ago… ‘Among the stalls where people […] prick themselves with the needle …’ I boderne hvor der altid er nogen der […] stikker sig på nåle... ‘In the stalls where there always is someone who […] pricks himself on needles…’

2.2

Construals in literary translation 

The explicitation of the position of the experiencer

We find in Danish a very strong tendency to explicitate the position of the experiencer of a given spatial relation by adding an “extra” particle to the particle that takes care of the relation between the objects. In example (1) above, the particle oppe (in oppe [up] fra Nordkap) tells us that the experiencer is “down” with respect to Nordkap, a piece of information which is left out or implicit in the Italian version. In (4) we find the omission in Italian of the experiencer’s position “outside” the tunnel and “up” with respect to the sleepers, while in (5) the Danish translator has taken care to specify this kind of information on spatial relations, which is not explicit in the Italian text. (4) (Høeg p.105/p.107) Jeg véd, at inde i tunnelen, inde under hjulene, nede mellem svellerne er der et lille punkt af lys... ‘I know, that in in the tunnel, in under the wheels, down between the sleepers is there a small spot of light…’ So che nel tunnel, sotto le ruote, fra le rotaie, c’è un puntino di luce... ‘I know that in the tunnel, under the wheels, between the tracks, there is a small spot of light…’ (5)

(Calvino p.117/p.100) questa credenza: che sospesa in cielo esista un’altra Bersabea... ‘this belief: that suspended in the sky exists another Bersabea...’ har folk […] troet, at der findes et andet Bersabea svævende oppe i himlen... ‘people have […] believed, that there exists another Bersabea floating up in the sky…’

Besides the fact that the Danish language user systematically seems to take into account the “beholder” of the spatial relation, adding the particle further emphasizes the indication of the directionality in the text, which I find significant in itself.

2.3

Topology

In a typical Danish text a large number of sentences will end with a spatial particle, either alone or followed by a substantive (the reference object or landmark of the spatial relation). This is the unmarked position of constructions coding spatial relations, while the position in Italian is, on the contrary, far more variable. There are many reasons for this. Some of them relate to language norm: in (6) and (7) the Italian language user could have placed the particle + reference object in a final position, but according to conventional coding has chosen not to.

 Hanne Jansen

(6)

(Satta p.81/p.61) levò in aria pecore e cani... ‘lifted in air sheep and dogs...’ og slyngede de arme får og hunde […] op i luften... ‘and threw the poor sheep and dogs […] up in the air...’

(7)

(Høeg p.87/p.89) jeg åbner el-safen og hænger nøglen på plads... ‘I open the electronic-safe and hang the key on place…’ apro la electronic-safe e rimetto a posto la chiave... ‘I open the electronic-safe and re-put at place the key…’

Other solutions are structurally determined, as in (8), where the construction of the phrasal verb samle op [gather up] and the object allows only for the postposition of the particle. (8)

(Satta p.97/p.74) correvano appresso al lampionaio, a raccogliere i fiammiferi spenti... ‘they ran after the lamplighter, to collect the matches burnt...’ løb i hælene på lygtemanden for at samle de afbrændte tændstikker op... ‘ran on the heels of the lamplighter to gather the burnt matches up…’

Structural determinacy explains (9) and (10) as well, where the final particles in Danish illustrate the common phenomenon of “stranded prepositions” (‘stranded’ in respect to its syntactic and logical regency), a construction not allowed in Italian. (9) (Calvino p.83/p.69) Nulla della città tocca il suolo tranne quelle lunghe gambe da fenicottero a cui si appoggia... ‘Nothing of the town touches the ground except those long legs of flamingo at which it leans...’ Der er intet af byen der rører jorden, bortset fra de lange flamingoben den står på... ‘There is nothing of the town that touches the ground, except the long flamingo legs it stands on…’ (10) (Høeg p.109/p.111) Det er den sidste indgang, omverdenen endnu ikke har forsøgt at klemme sig ind ad... ‘It is the last entrance, the world still not has tried to squeeze itself in through…’ È l’ultima entrata dalla quale il mondo esterno non ha ancora cercato di penetrare... ‘It is the last entrance from which the world outside not has yet tried to penetrate...’ But whether these construals are due to structural or to normative pressures, the interesting fact, in my opinion, is that by positioning the spatial particle at the end of the sentence, and doing it persistently, the spatial dimension of the conceived situation is emphasized by Danish language users.

2.4

Construals in literary translation 

Different lexicalisation patterns of movement verbs

The next differences are related to the typological distinction proposed by Talmy (1988) between satellite-framed and verb-framed languages. In satellite-framed or analytical languages, such as Danish and other Germanic languages, the direction of the movement is typically coded separately by a spatial particle (i.e. gå ind, gå ud, gå op, gå ned = go in, go out, go up, go down), while in verb-framed or synthetic languages, such as Italian and other Romance languages, both movement and direction are as a rule coded in the verb itself (i.e. entrare, uscire, salire, scendere = enter, exit, ascend, descend). The differences in lexicalisation patterns show clearly in the following example: (11) (Stangerup p.32/p.53) Han kommer til en kirke og går indenfor [...] at han lidt efter går op i kirketårnet. [...] Claus Berg kravler ned og går udenfor... ‘He comes to a church and goes inside [...] that he little after goes up in the church tower […] Claus Berg climbs down and goes outside…’ Arriva a una chiesa e entra [...] che sale in cima al campanile [...] Claus Berg ridiscende faticosamente ed esce... ‘He arrives at a church and enters [...] that he ascends in top of the tower […] Claus Berg redescends laboriously and exits…’ (11) also illustrates how the semantics of Danish movement verb includes not the direction as in Italian, but the modality of the movement, a feature which is stated with a separate adverb in Italian: crawls down <-> redescends laboriously. In (12) and (13), we see how in Italian the modality of the movement tends to be left implicit (approach, withdrew, descend), while the Danish language user is practically forced to specify it by his/her choice of verb (stagger, tiptoe, ride), adding instead the direction by a spatial particle. (12) (Satta p.261/p.205) Sgomenta, si avvicinò alla porta e bussò. [...] Credendo che dormisse, i due si allontanarono in punta di piedi... ‘Dejected, she approaches herself to the door and knocked [...] Believing that she slept, the two withdrew themselves on tiptoe…’ Nedslået vaklede hun hen til døren og bankede på. […] Da de mente hun sov, listede de ud på tåspidserne. ‘Dejected she staggered over to the door and knocked on. […] When they thought she slept, they tiptoed out on tiptoe…’ (13)

(Satta p.265/p.209) Don Sebastiano inforcò il cavallo e scese a Isporòsile... ‘Don Sebastiano mounted the horse and descended to Isporòsile...’ Don Sebastiano sadlede sin hest og red ned til Isporòsile... ‘Don Sebastiano saddled his horse and rode down to Isporòsile…’

 Hanne Jansen

It is interesting that the verb låse (= lock) in (14) is turned into a movement verb by the addition of ud (= out), while in Italian the modality of the movement (get out by unlocking a door) is omitted entirely, and is not even inferrable. (14)

2.5

(Høeg p.87/p.89) Så låser vi os ud... ‘Then we lock ourselves out…’ Poi usciamo… ‘Then we exit…’

The degree of transitivity

Besides the typological dichotomy concerning movement verbs (a dichotomy that partly accounts for the higher frequency of spatial particles in Danish), we find an interesting and quite systematic divergence between Danish and Italian in the degree of transitivity when coding a large range of physical interactions between entities – a constructional pattern involving again the spatial particle. In other words, where the Danish language user tends to use intransitive constructions, in Italian – when coding the same conceived situation – we often encounter transitive ones. (15)

(Calvino p.111/p.95) Guadato il fiume, valicato il passo, l’uomo si trova di fronte tutt’a un tratto... ‘Forded the river, crossed the pass, the man finds himself in front suddenly…’ Da han er kommet over floden og gennem passet, befinder han sig pludselig foran... ‘When he has come over the river and through the pass, he finds himself suddenly in front…’ In (16) and (17) we have verb couplets in Danish and Italian (fregarsi/gnide sig = rub himself/herself/itself/themselves, afferrare/gribe = seize) that are very close semantically. However, what in Italian is coded as a patient in a transitive relation (the hand; the bell wire), is turned in Danish into a spatial reference object (the landmark of the subject’s action), with the spatial particle functioning as a kind of spatial mediator. (16)

(Satta p.97/p.74) I nuoresi si fregarono le mani di nascosto... ‘The Nuoro-people rubbed themselves the hands in secret…’ Nuoreserne gned sig i hænderne... ‘The Nuoro-people rubbed themselves in the hands…’

(17)

(Stangerup p.32/p.53) griber i klokkesnoren med sine ødelagte hænder... ‘seized in the bell wire with his ruined hands…’ afferra la corda con le sue mani rovinate... ‘seized the wire with his hands ruined…’

Construals in literary translation 

In (18) and (19) the Italian language users focus on the agent-patient relation (the hoods hide the faces; the sea brings the wood), while in Danish the spatial relations between the objects are foregrounded, a static relation in (18) (the faces are placed under the hoods), a dynamic one in (19) (the wood is moving from the sea). (18)

(Calvino p.102/p.85) le facce erano nascoste da cappucci di sacco... ‘the faces were hidden by hoods of sackcloth…’ deres ansigter var skjult under hætter af sækkelærred... ‘their faces were hidden under hoods of sackcloth…’

(19)

(Stangerup p.16/p.28) At snitte i træ der skyller op fra havet... ‘To whittle in wood that washes up from the sea…’ Intagliare legno portato dal mare... ‘To whittle wood brought by the sea…’

In (20) the transition from the spatial perspective (go through) to the interactional one (break it) – we are talking about a frozen sea – is clear, and within the Italian vocabulary it would actually be difficult to find a way to construe the scene in an equally spatial perspective. (20)

(Høeg p.131/p.133) Ét skridt til, og jeg ville gå igennem... ‘One step more, and I would go through…’ Ancora un passo e lo spezzerei... ‘Yet one step and I would break it…’

This difference within lexicalisation patterns may not be so clear-cut as the dichotomy proposed by Talmy, but it is nevertheless quite pervasive and found in many different kinds of constructions. Again it seems to relate to the tendency in Danish to focus on the spatial and immediately perceivable features of the scene (and the spatial particle is assigned an important role in this kind of construal), while in Italian the transitive constructions emphasize instead the interactional relations between the objects.

2.6

Position verbs

The last examples illustrate the difference in the nature of the so-called position verbs in Danish and Italian. In Danish, in fact, when designating the position of an object with a verbal construction – that is, X [verb] on/in/under Y, or Z [verb] X on/in/under Y – the choice of verb is typically determined by the horizontality or verticality of the position, often related to the nature of the posited object and/or the reference object. In Italian, this specification of the position is normally left out; there are no swift ways to state it, and it seems not to be considered an essential feature to focus on in the

 Hanne Jansen

construal of the scene. In other words, where the unmarked way to code position in Italian is by generic verbs such as stare (= stay) or esser(ci) (= be-there), as well as the active counterpart mettere (= put), in Danish you must choose between ligge, sidde, stå, hænge (= lie, sit, stand, hang) and their active counterparts lægge, sætte, stille, hænge, according to the nature of the object and/or the position. In (7) above, the hanging back the key in Danish is replaced by the more generic putting back the key in Italian, leaving out the information on the nature of the position; in (21), the specification of the horizontality of the position of the houses in the Danish translation adds a not insignificant perceptual feature to the construal of the scene; in (22), the specification of the nature of the position may be considered rather redundant, but it nevertheless adds to the spatial dimension of the construal (together with the final position). (21)

(Calvino p.55/p.44) le tubature dell’acqua, che salgono verticali dove dovrebbero esserci le case... ‘the water pipes, that ascend vertical where should be-there the houses…’ vandrørene, der løber lodret op der hvor husene burde ligge... ‘the water pipes, that run vertically up there where the houses should lie…’

(22) (Høeg p.127/p.129) Han har en stor rulle bred, rød isoleringstape og en lille saks liggende på bordet... ‘He has a large reel of wide, read insulating tape and a small pair of scissors lying on the table…’ Ha sul tavolo un rotolo di nastro isolante largo e rosso e un paio di forbici piccole... ‘He has on the table a reel of insulating tape wide and red and a pair of small scissors…’ In (23)–(25), the Danish versions all contain a position verb (sit, hang, stand), set in a context of one or more spatial particles. This combination of position verbs and spatial particles imposes a strong spatial and visual emphasis on the construal of the scene, an emphasis not present in the Italian counterparts, whether original or translation, where the language users seem to focus on and foreground the interactional and instrumental relations instead. (23) (Calvino p.115/p.98) I cadaveri, seccati in modo che ne resti lo scheletro rivestito di pelle gialla... ‘The corpses, dried in a way that of them remains the skeleton sheathed by yellow skin…’ De tørrer ligene, således at huden bliver siddende som et gulligt hylster over skelettet... ‘They dry the corpses, so that the skin remains ‘sitting’ as a yellowish holster over the skeleton…’

(24)

Construals in literary translation 

(Stangerup p.24/p.41) De øverste dele må han lade hænge ned fra loftet i snore... ‘the upper parts he must let hang down from the ceiling in strings…’ mentre le parti superiori è costretto a fissarle al soffitto con delle corde... ‘while the upper parts he is forced to fix to the ceiling with some strings…’

In (25) the mental image evoked in Danish is dominated by basic spatial relations and almost austere in its simple static geometricality (candles positioned vertically in the snow on the graves); it is rendered in Italian by a dynamic image, building on relations of interaction and transitivity between the three objects involved: the candles (agent) lighten the graves (patient), and the graves (patient) are being covered by the snow (agent). (25)

(Stangerup p.24/p.41) ingen vokslys står tændte i sneen på gravene... ‘no wax-candles stand lit in the snow on the graves…’ nessun cero rischiara le tombe coperte di neve... ‘no wax-candle lightens the graves covered by snow…’

In all three examples the same conceived situations are depicted in the original texts and the translations, but the construals are in my opinion so different that they cannot but give rise to “qualitatively different mental experiences”, as Langacker says.

3. General discussion and conclusion Users of Italian and Danish seem to be forced by the rules of language systems and to be led by the norms of their languages to foreground different aspects of the situations or events to be textualized. As the examples have illustrated, in Danish a series of structural features – typological and topological, and many of them related to the spatial particle – permeates the language, determining at the level of normative restrictions a strong inclination towards spatial coding, i.e. a construal of the scene with special attention to the spatial dimension. The same emphasis on spatiality does not appear in Italian. The analysis above reveals in fact a systematic reinterpretation of the images of the text, in a spatial or non-spatial direction depending on the direction of the translation. In a study on verb-framed languages and satellite-framed languages, Dan Slobin discusses “the connection between linguistic forms and matters of rhetoric and usage”: These characteristics [of a verb-framed language] also interact with the particular type of lexicon in the language and with general constraints on the types of construction that are licensed. Finally, all of these factors ‘train’ the speakers – at least from late preschool age onwards – in the development of a particular rhetorical style.

 Hanne Jansen

[...] typologies of grammar have consequences for ‘typologies of rhetoric’. The effects of such typologies on usage may be strong enough to influence speakers’ narrative attention to particular conceptual domains. [...] Once such a rhetorical set has become established in a language, speakers may be loath to go beyond the norm even when there are no syntactic or semantic constraints that block particular expressions. (Slobin 1996: 217-218; my emphasis)

The general transition from a spatial perspective in Danish to a non-spatial or at least less spatial one in Italian (and instead, often more interactional or instrumental), could be explained by the existence of two different rhetorical sets – rhetorical sets that the translators are presumably not always conscious of following. In fact, as the Danish translator of one of the Italian texts, even though I was aware of the restructuring of the individual passages, I did not realize until afterwards that large parts of the restructuring in fact followed this pattern of spatial reinterpretation of the Italian text. I was not aware of conforming consistently to the conventional imagery of Danish – that is, consistently avoiding a construction that would “go beyond the norm even when there were no syntactic or semantic constraints that blocked particular expressions”. I was led, as I think were the other translators, by the wish to convey an immediate visual and evocative dimension to the new texts. It seems, however, that this striving for “equivalence” of immediate visuality inevitably implies an act of domestication or naturalization of the original imagery – in this case a distortion of a certain underlying perspective (more or less spatial) in conceptualizing experience. Bassnett (1980: 117) quotes Belloc’s suggestion that the essence of translation is “the resurrection of an alien thing in a native body” – but how “native” can the translator render the new text, without doing away with the Otherness of the foreign, the grasping of which is one of the basic reasons for translating? On the other hand, opting for Venuti’s notion of fidelity “that deliberately rejects the fluency ideal in favour of a translation that resists the normal usage of the target language” (cf. Chesterman 1997: 28), to what extent does the translator risk loosing instead the text’s “power of bringing visions into focus with our eyes shut”? I will not argue here for one strategy rather than the other, but conclude by stating that, in order to be able to choose between them in the act of literary translation, awareness of linguistic features like those highlighted here within the area of spatial particles and spatial imagery is indeed necessary.

Notes 1. I want to thank the anonymous referee and Sandra Halverson for their very useful comments on earlier versions of this paper. Any remaining shortcomings are of course my own responsibility.

Construals in literary translation 

2. To indicate this feature of a text Italo Calvino actually uses the term “visibility”, but in quite a different sense than that intended by Venuti. To avoid terminological confusion (the visibility of the text versus the visibility of the translator), I have chosen not to use it. 3. The texts are: Italo Calvino: Le città invisibili (1990 [1972]); Danish translation: De usynlige byer (1998) by Lene Waage Petersen; Salvatore Satta: Il giorno del giudizio (1979); Danish translation: Dommens dag (1989) by Hanne Jansen; Henrik Stangerup: Broder Jacob (1991); Italian translation: Fratello Jacob (1993) by Eva Kampmann; Peter Høeg: Frøken Smillas fornemmelse for sne (1998 [1992]); Italian translation: Il senso di Smilla per la neve (1994) by Bruno Berni. As can be seen, I am the translator of one of the texts used for illustration, a fact to which I will return in Section 3.

References Bassnett, Susan. 1980. Translation Studies. London & New York: Methuen. Calvino, Italo. 1988. Six Memos for the Next Millennium. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Chesterman, Andrew. 1997. Memes of Translation. The Spread of Ideas in Translation Theory. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Langacker, R. W. 1991 [1987]. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. I+II. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Malmkjær, Kirsten. 1999. Contrastive Linguistics and Translation. Utrecht: Platform Vertalen & Vertaalwetenschap. Slobin, Dan. 1996. “Two Ways of Travel: Verbs of Motion in English and Spanish”. In Grammatical Constructions. Their Form and Meaning, M. Shibatani and S. A. Thompson (eds), 195–219. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Tabakowska, Elzbieta. 1993. Cognitive Linguistics and Poetics of Translation. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Talmy, Leonard. 1988. “The relation of grammar to cognition”. In Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, B. Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.), 165–207. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Venuti, Lawrence. 2000. The Translation Studies Reader. London & New York: Routledge.

Phraseologie und Übersetzung unter Anwendung von Parallelkorpora* Heike van Lawick Universitat Jaume I, Castelló, Spain

This paper combines procedures of Descriptive Translation Studies, Corpus Linguistics and Cognitive Linguistics and has its roots in the author’s PhD thesis (Lawick 2001). Its aim is to analyze phrase-level units in a literary text and their translations, using aligned fragments of a parallel corpus (original text and translation), which permits the search for key words in different languages. The focus of this study is on somatisms, phrases with constituents referring to body-parts, which confer a special (metaphorical and literal) meaning to this kind of unit. It examines how these units are translated and if their figurative constituents are maintained.

Keywords: phraseological units, somatisms, literary texts

1. Einleitung Phraseologismen gelten allgemein als spezifischer Ausdruck jeder einzelnen Kultur und daher als besonders schwer übersetzbar. Andererseits können ihnen Bilder zugrunde liegen, die auf ähnliche menschliche Erfahrungen zurückgehen (vgl. Lakoff und Johnson 1980; Lakoff 1993). In diesem Beitrag soll eine Untersuchung phraseologischer Einheiten in einem literarischen Text und deren Übersetzung durchgeführt werden, um den Umgang mit phraseologischen Einheiten und Tendenzen bei Metaphorisierungsprozessen in verschiedenen Sprachen aufzuzeigen. Ausgangstext ist die Szenenfolge Furcht und Elend des III. Reiches (Brecht 1988), dem eine spanische (Brecht 1994) und eine katalanische Übersetzung (Brecht 2001) gegenübergestellt werden. Letztere stammt von der Autorin dieses Artikels, was aber die objektive Analyse der Daten nicht beeinflussen soll, da die Übersetzung selbst und die linguistische Analyse zeitlich weit auseinander liegen. Wir beschränken uns dabei auf Somatismen, also auf

 Heike van Lawick

Phraseologismen, bei denen mindestens eine Konstituente einen Körperteil bezeichnet. Es handelt sich um eine besonders große Gruppe innerhalb der Phraseologismen (vgl. Gréciano 1997; Wotjak 2000; Larreta 2001) und sie sind charakteristisch für den hier untersuchten Text (vgl. Lawick 2001). Zugriff auf die alinierten Texte erfolgt über ein für COVALT (Corpus Valenciano de Literatura Traducida) entwickeltes Programm, das erlaubt, ein Suchwort für einen der beiden Texte einzugeben, um alle Fragmente, in denen es vorkommt, mit den entsprechenden Übersetzungen zu erhalten. Unser Ansatz ist deskriptiv, wobei wir die quantitative Analyse des Korpus, der Empfehlung Sinclairs (1992) folgend, durch eine qualitative Untersuchung ergänzen. Aufgrund ihrer Konstituenten (z.B. Kopf, cap, cabeza) werden Somatismen in jedem der drei Texte ausfindig gemacht und einander gegenübergestellt. Dabei gehen wir von folgenden Hypothesen aus: (1) Wenn phraseologische Einheiten im Ausgangstext eine stilistische Funktion haben, wird im Zieltext versucht, diese durch phraseologische Übersetzungen wiederzugeben (übersetzungswissenschaftlicher Aspekt); (2) gemeinsame Tendenzen bei Metaphorisierungsprozessen in verschiedenen Sprachen bieten eine Erklärung für phraseologische Äquivalente mit gleichen Konstituenten (kognitiver Aspekt).

2. Phraseologismen und Metaphern Phraseologismen können in einem engeren oder weiteren Sinne verstanden werden (vgl. Burger 2003: 14–15). Ein Phraseologismus im weiteren Sinne erfüllt zwei Bedingungen: (1) er besteht aus mehr als einem Wort (Polylexikalität) und (2) er ist der Sprachgemeinschaft in einer relativ festen Kombination bekannt (Festigkeit oder lexikalisch-semantische Stabilität). Hierzu gehören auch Kollokationen wie sich die Zähne putzen, Routineformeln wie Guten Morgen (Burger 2003), Nominationsstereotype wie Tag und Nacht oder gesammelte Werke (Fleischer 1982), u. a. Ein Phraseologismus im engeren Sinne weist zusätzlich die Eigenschaft der Idiomatizität auf, d. h., dass „die Komponenten eine durch die syntaktischen und semantischen Regularitäten der Verknüpfung nicht voll erklärbare Einheit bilden“ (Burger 2003: 15), wie ins Gras beißen oder gang und gäbe; in diesem Fall sprechen wir auch von Idiomen. Für die Schnittstelle Phraseologie-Metaphorik liefert der Begriff der konzeptuellen Metapher aus der kognitiven Linguistik (vgl. Lakoff und Johnson 1980; Lakoff und Turner 1989; Lakoff 1993) einen Erklärungsansatz, der auch für die Beschreibung zwischensprachlicher Unterschiede bzw. Ähnlichkeiten herangezogen werden kann. In diesem Ansatz wird die figurative Bedeutung von sprachlichen Einheiten auf eine metaphorische oder metonymische Projektion (mapping) zurückgeführt. Metaphern und Metonymien werden dabei als kognitive Mechanismen verstanden, bei denen ein Zielbereich (target domain) mithilfe eines Quell- oder Bildspenderbereichs (source domain) konzeptualisiert wird; so wird z. B. das Leben bei folgenden Ausdrücken durch den Bereich eine Reise konzeptualisiert (vgl. Lakoff 1993): jmdm. stehen alle Wege

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

offen (‘jmd. hat viele gute Möglichkeiten für seine Zukunft’, DU11) oder jmdn. aus der Bahn schleudern/werfen (‘jmdn. aus seinem gewohnten Lebensgang reißen [und ihn etwas Falsches tun lassen’], DU11). Bei diesen unidirektionalen Prozessen verläuft die Projektion zumeist vom Konkreten, oft Physischen, zum Abstrakten (vgl. auch Jäkel 1997). Während bei Metaphern zwei unterschiedliche Domänen in Verbindung gesetzt werden, finden die Übertragungsprozesse bei den Metonymien innerhalb eines Bereiches statt, z. B. ein Teil für das Ganze: der Kopf für den Menschen in Kopf und Kragen riskieren (‘das Leben, die Existenz aufs Spiel setzen’, DU11). Dabei wird zwischen der konzeptuellen Metapher oder Metonymie und deren sprachlicher Realisierung unterschieden (vgl. Lakoff und Turner 1989: 50). Das gibt Aufschluss darüber, dass Somatismen verschiedener verwandter Sprachen mit gleichen oder ähnlichen Konstituenten oft auf den gleichen Übertragungsmechanismen beruhen, obwohl sie in den Einzelsprachen zumeist unterschiedlich realisiert werden. Nach Eismann (2002: 123) scheint es im Bereich der Somatismen “Modelle zu geben, die selbst bei erfundenen Phraseologismen […] zu Bedeutungen führen, die an den Modellen der vorhandenen Phraseologismen orientiert sind”. Aus demselben Grund müsste ein Somatismus einer Sprache A in einer verwandten Sprache B verständlich sein, auch wenn diese nicht über ein ähnlich geformtes Äquivalent verfügt. Das gilt vor allem dann, wenn es sich um synchron motivierte Phraseologismen handelt, also um Wortverbindungen, deren Bedeutung aus ihrer wörtlichen Lesart verstehbar ist (vgl. Burger 2003), wie in von der Hand in den Mund leben (‘die Einnahmen sofort für die Lebensbedürfnisse wieder ausgeben’, DU11). Bei idiomatischen Phraseologismen ist die wörtliche Lesart oft von Bedeutung (vgl. Häcki-Buhofer 1989; Gréciano 1992). Dabei spielen die Konstituenten eine wesentliche Rolle. In diesem Zusammenhang spricht Eismann von der zweifachen Natur der Phraseologismen […] – als eine[r] aus primären Bedeutungen zusammengesetzte[n] sekundäre[n] Bedeutung –, die nicht nur potentiell ein Oszillieren zwischen primärer und übertragener Bedeutung erlaubt, sondern die in bestimmten Fällen die primären Bedeutungen mehr oder weniger (relativ unabhängig vom Kontext) mitrealisiert (Eismann 1995: 100).

Bei literarischen Texten mit einer stilistischen Funktion ist diese „zweifache Natur“ besonders ausgeprägt, weshall ihr bei der Übersetzung besonders Rechnung zu tragen ist.

3. Fallstudie In der Szenenfolge Furcht und Elend des III. Reiches setzt Brecht Phraseologismen als Stilmittel ein, um die Alltagssprache der Figuren zu charakterisieren, die das „gleichgeschaltete Deutsch“ im Hitlerdeutschland widerspiegelt. Die bewusst volksnahe Sprachverwendung im Nationalsozialismus, der Lingua Tertii Imperii, wurde u. a. von

 Heike van Lawick

Klemperer (1975) dargestellt. Teil dieser Sprache, die vom Propaganda-Apparat ständig verbreitet wurde, sind vor allem Somatismen: Überhaupt bevorzugt Hitler körperbezogene Redensarten, die seine aggressiven Tiraden metaphorisch unterstreichen und oft auch das Gewalttätige seiner Gedankengänge volkssprachlich widerspiegeln. So gibt es Dutzende von Redensarten, die Körperteile wie Augen, Füße, Haare, Kopf, Rückgrat, Finger, Mund, Hände, Leib, Ohren, Achseln und Schultern enthalten (Mieder 1997).

Aber Brecht greift auch zu Phraseologismen, um durch das ihnen zugrundeliegende Bild bestimmte Gesten zu unterstreichen. So ist es wohl kein Zufall, dass die meisten Somatismen des Stückes auf der Konstituente Mund (Maul, Lippe, Zunge) beruhen, die im Zusammenhang mit der (Un)Möglichkeit des freien Sprachgebrauchs zu sehen ist: den Mund/das Maul halten, das Maul verbrennen, mit dem Maul sind sie groß, das Maul aufmachen, eine Lippe riskieren, auf seine Zunge aufpassen. In einem Stück, dessen Handlung im „Dritten Reich“ angesiedelt ist, sind diese Gesten ebenso wichtig wie das durch die Phraseologismen historisch und sozial gekennzeichnete Sprachregister. Das bedeutet, dass die metaphorische bzw. metonymische Grundlage dieser Ausdrücke textrelevant ist, weshalb wir untersuchen wollen, ob sie in den Übersetzungen erhalten blieb. Die Untersuchung mithilfe von Textkorpora legt nahe, die Phraseologismen aufgrund ihrer (bildlichen) Konstituenten ausfindig zu machen. Dabei führen wir unsere Analyse in drei Schritten aus. Im ersten Schritt untersuchen wir das quantitative Vorkommen von Somatismen in jedem Text einzeln. Das erlaubt uns, auch die in den Zieltexten vorhandenen Somatismen mit den entsprechenden Fragmenten im Ausgangstext zu vergleichen. Die so erhaltenen Einheiten werden im zweiten Schritt qualitativ ausgewertet, wobei wir zunächst von einem Phraseologismusbegriff im weiteren Sinne ausgehen. Auf diese Weise erfassen wir mehr Somatismen, die mit der gleichen Konstituente gebildet worden sind, was Aufschlüsse aus kontrastiver Sicht geben kann. Einwortmetaphern, deren figurative Bedeutung durch ähnliche Projektionsvorgänge erklärt werden kann wie bei Phraseologismen, werden berücksichtigt, wenn sie im Zusammenhang mit Redewendungen aus dem gleichen Quellbereich stehen, wie z. B. rückgratlos, das sich aus Rückgrat haben (‘charakterfest sein’, DU11) herleiten lässt. In einem dritten Schritt schränken wir die Phraseologismen auf solche im engeren Sinne ein, also auf diejenigen, die sich zudem durch die Eigenschaft der Idiomatizität auszeichnen. Die Angaben beziehen sich nur auf den gesprochenen Text (ohne Bühnenanweisungen). Dabei werden mehrmals vorkommende Phraseologismen auch mehrmals gezählt, da es uns um die Frage ging, wie viele Somatismen insgesamt (tokens) im Text vorkommen, nicht wie viele verschiedene Somatismen (types) dort gebraucht werden.

3.1

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

Quantitative Untersuchung

Tabelle 1. Gesamtvorkommen der Somatismen im Korpus Spanischer Zieltext

Ausgangstext Maul Mund Zunge Lippe Auge Hand Kopf Köpfchen Kasten (= Kopf) Genick Ohren Knochen Rückgrat Beine Arsch Gesicht Schädel Nerven Insgesamt:

4 2 2 1 5 4 3 1 1 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 38

boca/bocaza cara ojos mano(s) cabeza cuello huesos pie frente culo oído columna vertebral

Katalanischer Zieltext 7 3 2 4 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

30

boca morros llengua ull(s)/ullet mà/mans cap coll orella/orelles ossos peu cara crisma cor cul columna vertebral

5 1 3 4 7 21 1 2 1 2 6 1 1 1 1

57

Der Ausgangstext enthält achtunddreißig Somatismen, der spanische Zieltext dreißig und der katalanische siebenundfünfzig Somatismen (Tabelle 1). Dabei überwiegen im deutschen Text die Phraseologismen mit der Konstituente Mund/Maul und deren metonymisch dafür stehende Lippe und Zunge, mit insgesamt neun phraseologischen Ausdrücken. Dem entsprechen in der spanischen Fassung sieben (boca) und in der katalanischen Fassung neun Somatismen (5 x boca, 1 x morro und 3 x llengua). Auffallend ist die Anzahl von einundzwanzig Phraseologismen mit der Konstituente cap im Katalanischen, von denen elf allerdings grammatikalisiert sind, wobei unter Grammatikalisierung der Übergang lexikalischen Sprachmaterials in den Bereich der grammatikalischen Kategorien zu verstehen ist. Den restlichen zehn idiomatischen Ausdrücken dieser Fassung stehen sechs im spanischen Zieltext (cabeza) und sechs im Ausgangstext (Kopf, Köpfchen, Kasten, Schädel) gegenüber. Das lässt vermuten, dass die katalanische Konstituente cap häufiger in Phraseologismen erscheint als die deutsche Konstituente Kopf. So finden sich unter den Redewendungen im Duden (DU11) 112 Einträge zu Kopf (und 7 zu Haupt), gegenüber 359 Einträgen zu cap als Substantiv (zusätzlich erscheinen 39 Phraseologismen mit cap als Adjektiv und 8 als Präposition) in Espinal (2004).

 Heike van Lawick

Tatsächlich ist eine unterschiedliche Entwicklung dieser Konstituente in den verschiedenen Sprachen festzustellen, die allerdings von der gleichen metaphorischen Projektion ausgeht. In allen drei Sprachen steht Kopf metonymisch für die ganze Person: der Kopf des Unternehmens (‘an der Spitze von etwas stehende Person’, DDU), pro Kopf (‘Einzelperson innerhalb einer größeren Menge von Menschen’, DDU); cabeza de familia und cap de casa (‘Familienoberhaupt’) oder cabeza de lista und cap de llista (‘Spitzenkandidat’, DAA und DCA); wir rechnen diese Wortgruppen als nominale Kollokationen zu den Phraseologismen im weiteren Sinne. In einer Übertragung von Person zu Objekt ist der Kopf ‘oberer Teil oder Vorderende von etwas, dem eine bestimmte Wichtigkeit zukommt’ (DDU), wie in der Kopf eines Briefbogens oder Hauptstadt. Mit ähnlicher Bedeutung sind im Spanischen und Katalanischen Ausdrücke wie cabeza de partido bzw. cap de partit (‘Bezirkshauptstadt’, DAA und DCA) zu finden. Im Katalanischen erscheint cap aber auch in Ausdrücken der Zeit, wie in cap de setmana (‘Wochenende’, DCA) oder in der präpositionalen Wendung al cap de (‘nach [einem gewissen Zeitraum]’, DCA). Dementsprechend findet man im Spanischen zum Ausdruck der Zeit al cabo de (‘nach [einem gewissen Zeitraum]’, DUE). In den drei Sprachen ist also eine ähnliche Bedeutungserweiterung festzustellen, aber die Entwicklungsstadien sind in jeder Sprache anders. Aus diachronischer Sicht ist im Katalanischen ein Bedeutungswandel zu beobachten, der im Zusammenhang mit den beiden beschriebenen semantischen Erweiterungsprozessen steht (vgl. Salvador 1989) und der eine Erklärung für das höhere Vorkommen von Ausdrücken mit der Konstituente cap in unserem Korpus bietet. Außerdem zeigt das Ergebnis der quantitativen Untersuchung, dass die phraseologische Aktivität im spanischen Zieltext kaum geringer ist als im Ausgangstext; im katalanischen ist sie sogar höher, was mit der beschriebenen Bedeutungserweiterung von cap im Katalanischen zusammenhängt.

3.2

Qualitative Auswertung

Den Postulaten der kognitiven Linguistik folgend, gehen wir davon aus, dass bei allen Phraseologismen eine metaphorische Projektion stattgefunden hat. Deshalb nehmen wir für die Auswertung folgende von Toury (1995: 82–83) vorgeschlagenen übersetzungstechniken zur Grundlage:

1. Metapher

→ gleiche Metapher (gleicher Bereich)

2. Metapher

→ andere Metapher

(Metaphernverschiebung; anderer Bereich)

3. Metapher

→ Nichtmetapher

4. Metapher

→ Ø (Auslassung)

5. Nichtmetapher → Metapher (Kompensierung)

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

6. Ø (kein → Metapher (Hinzufügung einer Metapher) enstsprechendes Textsegment) Dabei verstehen wir bei (1), dass die verglichenen Ausdrücke zum gleichen metaphorischen Bereich gehören, während sie bei (2) aus unterschiedlichen Bereichen kommen. In den restlichen Fällen steht Metapher für metaphorischer Ausdruck. Auf eine Unterscheidung zwischen Metapher und Metonymie wird im Weiteren verzichtet. Tabelle 2. Gesamtauswertung Spanische Übersetzung Metapher → gleiche Metapher Metapher → Nichtmetapher Metapher → andere Metapher Nichtmetapher → Metapher Metapher → Ø Insgesamt

14 15 15 18 1 63

Katalanische Übersetzung 20 4 21 27 72

Die Übersicht (Tabelle 2) bestätigt, dass metaphorische Ausdrücke im katalanischen Text etwas stärker vertreten sind als im spanischen. Der Unterschied zu den Gesamtzahlen der Somatismen (Tabelle 1) ergibt sich aus der Einberechnung der Nichtmetaphern und dadurch, dass es sich bei der Übersetzung durch eine andere Metapher nicht immer um einen Somatismus handelt. In den nachfolgenden Tabellen wird auch zusätzlich in Klammern angegeben, ob es sich um eine Einwortmetapher, um einen modifizierten oder um gar keinen Phraseologismus handelt. Nach Tabelle 3 sind in der spanischen Übersetzung vierzehn, in der katalanischen zwanzig Ausdrücke aus dem gleichen metaphorischen Quellbereich festgestellt worden; in zwei Fällen handelt es sich dabei nicht um Phraseologismen im Spanischen (Beispiele 2 und 33), einmal im Katalanischen (33). Man könnte in vierzehn Fällen von Totaläquivalenten sprechen, da sie in den drei semantischen Parametern des zwischensprachlichen Vergleichs (vgl. Corpas 2000) übereinstimmen: sie haben die gleiche Gesamtbedeutung, den gleichen Bildspenderbereich und gleiche oder sehr ähnliche Konstituenten. Es sind die Beispiele (2), (3), (5), (12), (18), (19), (20), (21), (22), (27), (29), (30), (33) und (35). Hier wurden auch die drei metaphorischen aber nicht phraseologischen Entsprechungen mit einbezogen (zwei im spanischen Text und eine im katalanischen), da sie im Kontext verständlich sind.

 Heike van Lawick

Tabelle 3. Metapher → gleiche Metapher Deutscher Ausdruck

Spanische Übersetzung

Katalanische Übersetzung

(2) mit dem Maul groß sein

tener grande la bocaza (kein Phraseologismus) cerrar la boca abrir la boca

tenir uns morros que es trepitgen tenir la boca tancada obrir la boca tenir la boca tancada

(3) das Maul halten (5) das Maul aufmachen (6) reinen Mund halten (modifiziert) (8) auf seine Zunge aufpassen (9) auf seine Zunge aufpassen (12) mit klaren Augen (betrachten) (16) an der Hand haben (18) starke Hand (19) in Gottes Hand stehen (20) den Kopf vergessen (21) sich den Kopf zerbrechen (22) den Kopf sinken lassen (modifiziert) (27) (jmd.) das Genick brechen (29) die Wände haben Ohren (30) bis auf die Knochen (33) rückgratlos (Einwortmetapher) (35) am Arsch lecken (42) Will ich nicht dein Bruder sein, dann schlägst du mir den Schädel ein (54) unter der Hand

(mirar) con los ojos muy abiertos mano firme estar en manos de Dios olvidar la cabeza romperse la cabeza bajar la cabeza romper el cuello (a alguien) las paredes oyen hasta los huesos sin columna vertebral (kein Phraseologismus) pasarse por el culo

vigilar la llengua (modifiziert) vigilar la llengua (modifiziert) (mirar) amb els ulls ben oberts tenir [gent] a mà mà forta estar a les mans de Déu deixar-se el cap trencar-se el cap abaixar el cap trencar el coll (a algú) les parets tenen orelles fins als ossos sense columna vertebral (kein Phraseologismus) passar-se pel cul Si no vull ser el teu germà, la crisma m’has de trencar per sota mà

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

Tabelle 4. Metapher → Nichtmetapher Deutscher Ausdruck

Spanische Übersetzung

(1) sich das Maul verbrennen

decir impertinencias (kein Phraseologismus) descubrir (kein Phraseologismus) dejar de hablar tener cuidado tener cuidado decir algo investigar (kein Phraseologismus) hacer por alguien resultar fácil pensar un poco saber (kein Phraseologismus) no poder librarse saber (kein Phraseologismus) esperar firmeza (kein Phraseologismus) ver (kein Phraseologismus)

(3) etwas spannen (Einwortmetapher) (7) den Mund halten (8) auf seine Zunge aufpassen (9) auf seine Zunge aufpassen (10) eine Lippe riskieren (11) das Auge lenken (modifiziert) (16) an der Hand haben (17) von der Hand gehen (23) Köpfchen haben (24) auf dem Kasten haben (25) auf dem Genick haben (28) zu Ohren kommen (32) Rückgrat erwarten (modifiziert) (36) zu Gesicht bekommen (45) die Nerven verlieren

Katalanische Übersetzung

fixar-se (kein Phraseologismus) resultar fàcil tenir idees (al cap)

posar-se nerviós

Die Übersetzung Metapher → Nichtmetapher (Tabelle 4) ist fünfzehn Mal im spanischen, vier Mal im katalanischen Text zu finden. In drei Fällen haben beide Zieltexte auf eine metaphorische Übersetzung verzichtet: das Auge lenken (11), von der Hand gehen (17) und Köpfchen haben (23). Dabei handelt es sich einmal um einen modifizierten Phraseologismus im Deutschen (11), der vielleicht nicht als solcher erkannt worden ist. Die spanische Übersetzung weist acht Kollokationen und sieben nicht phraseologische Lösungen auf. Die katalanische Übersetzung hat (in Übereinstimmung mit der spanischen) nur einmal auf ein phraseologisches Äquivalent verzichtet (11). Tabelle 5. Metapher → Ø (Auslassung) Deutscher Ausdruck

Spanische Übersetzung

(6) reinen Mund halten (modifiziert)

Auslassung

Katalanische Übersetzung

 Heike van Lawick

In den untersuchten Fragmenten wurde nur eine Auslassung festgestellt; hier wurde der ganze Satz nicht übersetzt (Tabelle 5). Die Übersetzung Metapher → andere Metapher (Tabelle 6) findet sich fünfzehn Mal im spanischen Zieltext, einundzwanzig Mal im katalanischen; beide Zieltexte stimmen in zwölf Fällen überein (13, 14, 15, 26, 31, 34, 37, 40, 41, 44, 46 und 56). Der Zugriff auf eine andere Metapher kann einerseits dadurch begründet werden, dass in einigen Fällen die Zielsprache zwar über Phraseologismen aus dem gleichen metaphorischen Quellbereich verfügt, diese aber nicht die gleiche Bedeutung haben, wie z. B. bei (13), wo dem (große) Augen machen das katalanische fer els ulls grossos (‘deixar fer, deixar passar quelcom aparentant no veure-ho’, Espinal 2004) entsprechen könnte; eine ähnliche bildliche Grundlage besteht auch in obrir ull oder fer ull (‘aclarir-se el cel deixant-se veure un tros de cel sense núvols’, Espinal 2004), wie auch im spanischen abrir los ojos (1. ‘estar o ponerse en actitud vigilante’; 2. ‘percatarse alguien de cierta cosa que le conviene conocer y a la que antes no había prestado atención’, DUE). In all diesen Fällen kann man von falschen Freunden sprechen. Eine zweite Begründung ist das Fehlen phraseologischer Äquivalente mit gleichen Konstituenten in den Zielsprachen, wie bei (14), (26) und (34). Obwohl es sich um die Übersetzung einer Metapher durch eine andere Metapher handelt, weisen beide Zieltexte jeweils neun Somatismen auf, also Phraseologismen aus einem ähnlichen Bildspenderbereich. Dabei fällt weiter auf, dass fünf der metaphorischen Ausdrücke im Ausgangstext keine Bezeichnungen für Körperteile als Konstituenten haben (40, 41, 44, 46 und 56) und einer keinen Phraseologismus darstellt (37), wohl aber einen metaphorischen Ausdruck, der in beiden Zielsprachen mit Somatismen übersetzt wurde. Man könnte hier also von einer Teil-Kompensierung sprechen, mit der die Übersetzer Somatismen an anderen Stellen in den Text eingebracht haben. Diese Tendenz wird in der nächsten Gruppe noch deutlicher.

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

Tabelle 6. Metapher → andere Metapher Deutscher Ausdruck (1) sich das Maul verbrennen (3) etwas spannen (Einwortmetapher) (7) den Mund halten (10) eine Lippe riskieren (13) Augen machen (14) ins Auge blicken (15) vor Augen halten (24) auf dem Kasten haben (25) auf dem Genick haben (26) auf dem Genick haben (28) zu Ohren kommen (31) in die Knochen fahren (32) Rückgrat erwarten (modifiziert) (34) die Beine aus dem Leib rennen (36) zu Gesicht bekommen (37) (nichts) aus dem Brunnen fischen (kein Phraseologismus) (40) (k)einen Ton von sich geben (41) wuppdichhastenichtgesehn (42) Will ich nicht dein Bruder sein, dann schlägst du mir den Schädel ein (44) an der Spitze (45) die Nerven verlieren (46) außer Rand und Band kommen (54) unter der Hand (56) Vorsicht ist die Mutter der Porzellankiste

Spanische Übersetzung

poner cara mirar de frente tener presente

tener encima entrar (algo a alguien)

desvivirse (Einwortmetapher) (no) decir esta boca es mía

(no) decir esta boca es mía

Katalanische Übersetzung temptar el diable ensumar (Einwortmetapher) deixar-se estar [d’una cosa] anar-se’n de la llengua fer cara mirar cara a cara tenir present (tenir) matèria grisa treure del damunt tenir a sobre tenir notícia arribar al cor dur el cap alt desllomar-se (Einwortmetapher) posar al davant A boca tancada no hi entren mosques (no) badar boca

en un abrir y cerrar de ojos en un obrir i tancar els ulls Si no quiero ser tu hermano, tú me sentarás la mano a la cabeza perder la cabeza perder la cabeza bajo cuerda cuando se tiene el tejado de vidrio hay que ser prudente.

al davant sortir de mare

Qui té el cap de vidre, que no jugui a tirar pedres.

 Heike van Lawick

Tabelle 7. Nichtmetapher → Metapher Deutscher Ausdruck

Spanische Übersetzung

(38) ausplaudern (39) schweigen (43) Arbeitsbeschaffung (47) reinlaufen (48) aufstehen (49) dreinsehen (50) gegenübertreten (51) zuplinkern (52) begrüßt werden (53) geschickt sein (55) (etwas) abnehmen (57) sich auskennen (58) immerhin (59) sich überlegen (60) nach (61) schließlich (62) schließlich (63) denken (an) (64) Oberarzt (65) Gruppenführer (66) schließlich (67) hineinreden (68) schließlich (69) Neujahr (70) Gruppenführer (71) schließlich (72) entgegentreten (73) nachweisen (74) ins Ohr (75) Anlass geben

irse de la boca cerrar la boca mano de obra (hacer) a pie ponerse de pie poner cara (encontrar) de cara hacer señas ver con agrado

al fin y al cabo al cabo de al fin y al cabo al fin y al cabo

al fin y al cabo Año Nuevo al fin y al cabo

al oído dar lugar

Katalanische Übersetzung

mà d‘obra (fer) a peu fer cara plantar cara fer l’ullet veure amb bons ulls tenir bona mà treure de les mans lligar caps al cap i a la fi passar pel cap al cap de al cap y a la fi al cap y a la fi venir al cap metge en cap cap de grup al cap i a la fi omplir el cap al cap y a la fi cap d’any cap de grup al cap i a la fi plantar cara tirar en cara a cau d’orella donar peu

Tabelle 7 gibt die Kompensierungen wieder. Allerdings sind im katalanischen Zieltext fünf Nominalsyntagmen zu finden – einmal mit der Konstituente mà (Hand), vier Mal mit der Konstituente cap (Kopf) – (43, 64, 65, 69, 70), im spanischen eines (43) mit mano (Hand). Außerdem sind im spanischen Text sechs, im katalanischen sieben Phraseologismen mit der Konstituente cap/cabo nachzuweisen, die als grammatikalisiert bezeichnet werden können. Dabei handelt es sich fünf Mal um die Übersetzung

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

von schließlich, einmal um immerhin und einmal um das zeitliche nach. In diesen Fällen kann man also nicht von einer Kompensierung sprechen.

3.3

Untersuchung der idiomatischen Somatismen

Wir wollen in einem dritten Schritt die Phraseologismen auf solche im engeren Sinne begrenzen, also auf nur idiomatische und noch nicht grammatikalisierte, denn präpositionale bzw. adverbiale Ausdrücke wie al cap de/al cabo de oder al cap i a la fi/al fin y al cabo können ebenso zum Grenzbereich der Phraseologie gerechnet werden wie die Nominalsyntagmen metge en cap oder cap de grup. Demnach müssten im Katalanischen sowohl die sieben erwähnten Phraseologismen, wie auch die fünf Nominalsyntagmen ausgeklammert werden. Im Spanischen wäre ein Nominalsyntagma und die sechs Phraseologismen mit der Konstituente cabo abzuziehen. So betrachtet handelt es sich im spanischen Text neun Mal um Idiome (38, 39, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 74, 75), im katalanischen fünfzehn Mal (47, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 57, 59, 63, 67, 72, 73, 74, 75). Dabei sind sieben der spanischen und alle katalanischen Idiome Somatismen. Wenden wir dasselbe Kriterium auf alle im Text untersuchten Phraseologismen an, so bleiben siebenundzwanzig idiomatische Somatismen im spanischen (elf aus Tabelle 3, neun aus Tabelle 6 und sieben aus Tabelle 7) und dreiundvierzig im katalanischen Text (neunzehn aus Tabelle 3, neun aus Tabelle 6 und fünfzehn aus Tabelle 7). Die Verteilung von Idiomen, unter deren Konstituenten sich ein Körperteil befindet, ist in Tabelle 8 aufgeführt. Tabelle 8. Idiomatische Somatismen Deutscher Ausdruck

Spanische Übersetzung

Katalanische Übersetzung

38

27

43

Wie aus Tabelle 8 zu ersehen ist, nähert sich die katalanische Übersetzung mit insgesamt dreiundvierzig idiomatischen Somatismen mehr dem Originaltext. Mit siebenundzwanzig Idiomen kann man bei der spanischen Übersetzung von einem leichten Verlust der Expressivität oder des konnotativen Mehrwerts sprechen, der Idiome charakterisiert (vgl. Burger 2003: 78). Der Vergleich dieser Zahlen mit denen aus Tabelle 1 macht deutlich, dass im spanischen Text fast alle Somatismen idiomatisch sind (siebenundzwanzig von dreißig), was mit daran liegt, dass die Phraseologismen mit der Konstituente cabo anfangs nicht erfasst wurden, da diese sich, trotz ihrer Etymologie (lat. caput), nicht auf einen Körperteil beziehen. Bei den drei restlichen Ausdrücken (2, 33 und 43) handelt es sich nicht um Phraseologismen im engeren Sinne. Im katalanischen Text dagegen sind nur dreiundvierzig von insgesamt siebenundfünfzig Somatismen idiomatisch, was daran liegt, dass zwölf davon zu den eben besprochenen präpositionalen bzw. adverbialen

 Heike van Lawick

Ausdrücken und Nominalgruppen gehören. In zwei weiteren Fällen (23 und 33) handelt es sich nicht um Phraseologismen.

4. Schlussfolgerung Unsere Analyse hat ergeben, dass die phraseologische Aktivität in den Zieltexten nicht wesentlich geringer ist als im Ausgangstext. Das größere Vorkommen von Somatismen im katalanischen Zieltext ist hauptsächlich damit zu erklären, dass das Lexem cap sehr häufig in Phraseologismen dieser Sprache auftaucht, was mit Prozessen der semantischen Bedeutungserweiterung zusammenhängt. Hier kann man also von einem Ergebnis aus kontrastiver Sicht sprechen, das allerdings in Untersuchungen größerer Textkorpora bestätigt werden müsste. Andererseits ist die katalanische Übersetzung auch mehr am Ausgangstext orientiert, da sie mehrfach Phraseologismen aus einem ähnlichen Quellbereich aufweist. In drei Fällen wurde auf eine phraseologische Übersetzung zugunsten der Beibehaltung der gleichen Metapher verzichtet, wobei es sich um motivierte Phraseologismen handelt. Bei der Übersetzung einer Metapher durch eine Nichtmetapher wurde eine große Anzahl von Kollokationen in den Zieltexten festgestellt, die der phraseologischen Aktivität des Ausgangstextes Rechnung tragen. Die Übersetzung einer Metapher durch eine andere Metapher ist durch das Fehlen entsprechender Äquivalente in den Zielsprachen zu erklären. In dieser Gruppe wurden einige Fälle von Teil-Kompensierungen gefunden, bei denen ein Nicht-Somatismus durch einen Somatismus der Zielsprache übersetzt wurde. Beide Zieltexte weisen Kompensierungen (Übersetzung einer Nichtmetapher durch eine Metapher) auf. Das deutet darauf hin, dass in den Zieltexten versucht wurde, die globale Präsenz von phraseologischen Einheiten und vor allem auch von Somatismen widerzuspiegeln. Insgesamt wurden vierzehn phraseologische Entsprechungen aus dem gleichen Bildspenderbereich festgestellt, was die Hypothese gemeinsamer Tendenzen bei der Bildung von Metaphern in verschiedenen Sprachen zu stützen scheint. Es wäre wünschenswert, dieses Ergebnis mithilfe größerer Textkorpora zu überprüfen.

Anmerkung * Der vorliegende Beitrag entstand mit Unterstützung des Spanischen Ministeriums für Wissenschaft und Technologie (BFF2003–05422; Plan Nacional de Investigación Científica, Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica [I+D+I]) mit Unterstützung des FEDER Fonds der EU und der Stiftung Caixa Castelló-Bancaixa (P1 1B2003–25).

Phraseologie und Übersetzung 

Literatur Brecht, Bertolt. 1988. Furcht und Elend des III. Reiches. In Große kommentierte Berliner und Frankfurter Ausgabe, Band 4, Stücke 4, 339–455. Berlin & Weimar: Aufbau-Verlag; Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag. Brecht, Bertolt. 1994. Terror y miseria del Tercer Reich. In Teatro Completo, vol. VI., 41–160. Übersetzung von Miguel Sáenz. Madrid: Alianza. Brecht, Bertolt. 2001. Terror i misèria del Tercer Reich. In Teatre Complet, vol. II., 565–693. Übersetzung von Heike van Lawick. Barcelona: Institut del Teatre. Burger, Harald. 2003. Phraseologie: eine Einführung am Beispiel des Deutschen. 2. Aufl. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag. Corpas Pastor, Gloria. 2000. “Fraseología y traducción”. In El discurs prefabricat. Estudis de fraseologia teòrica i aplicada, V. Salvador und A. Piquer (Hg.), 107–138. Castelló: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. DAA. 1997. Diccionario Avanzado Alemán. Stuttgart: Klett. DCA. Batlle, Lluís C., Günther Haensch, Tilbert Stegmann und Gabriele Worth. 1991. Diccionari català-alemany. Barcelona: Enciclopèdia Catalana. DDU. 2001. Duden. Deutsches Universalwörterbuch 4. Aufl. Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut & F. A. Brockhaus AG (CD-ROM). DU11. 1995. Band 11. Duden Redewendungen und sprichwörtliche Redensarten. Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut & F.A. Brockhaus AG. DUE. Moliner, María. 2001. Diccionario de uso español, elektronische Version. Madrid: Gredos. Eismann, Wolfgang. 1995. “Pragmatik und kulturelle Spezifik als Problem der Äquivalenz von Phraseologismen”. In Von der Einwortmetapher zur Satzmetapher. Akten des Westfälischen Arbeitskreises Phraseologie/Parömiologie, R. S. Baur und C. Chlosta (Hg.), 95–119. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Eismann, Wolfgang. 2002. “Gibt es phraseologische Weltbilder? Nationales und Universales in der Phraseologie”. In Wer A sägt, muss auch B sägen. Beiträge zur Phraseologie und Sprichwortforschung aus dem Westfälischen Arbeitskreis, D. Hartmann und J. Wirrer (Hg.), 107– 126. Hohengehren: Schneider. Espinal, M. Teresa. 2004. Diccionari de sinònims de frases fetes. Barcelona und València: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Universitat de València, Abadia de Montserrat. Fleischer, Wolfgang. 1982. Phraseologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut. Gréciano, Gertrud. 1992. “Leitbegriffe und Leitbilder in der deutschen Phraseologie”. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 21: 33–45. Gréciano, Gertrud. 1997. “Deutsch-Französische Konvergenzen”. In Phraseme in Kontext und Kontrast, G. Gréciano und A. Rothkegel (Hg.), 99–115. Bochum: Brockmeyer. Häcki-Buhofer, Annelies. 1989. “Psycholinguistische Aspekte in der Bildhaftigkeit von Phraseologismen”. In Europhras 88. Phraséologie Contrastive. Actes du Colloque International. Klingenthal – Strasbourg, 12–15 mai 1988, G. Gréciano (Hg.), 165–175. Strasbourg: Université des Sciences Humaines, Département d’Études Allemandes. Jäkel, Olaf. 1997. Metaphern in abstrakten Diskursdomänen – Eine kognitiv-linguistische Untersuchung anhand der Bereiche Geistestätigkeit, Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. Klemperer, Victor. 1975. LTI. Notizbuch eines Philologen. Leipzig: Reclam Verlag.

 Heike van Lawick Lakoff, George. 1993. “The contemporary theory of metaphor”. In Metaphor and Thought, A. Ortony (Hg.), 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, George und Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George und Turner, Mark. 1989. More than cool reason. A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Larreta Zulategui, Juan Pablo. 2001. Fraseologia contrastiva del alemán y el español. Teoría y práctica a partir de un corpus bilingüe de somatismos. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Lawick, Heike van. 2001. Metaforicitat i Traductologia: Anàlisi d’un corpus de traduccions de l’alemany (LO) a diverses llengües romàniques (LM). Dissertation. Castelló: Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Romànica, Universitat Jaume I. Mieder, Wolfgang. 1997 “‘... als ob ich Herr der Lage würde’. Zur Sprichwortmanipulation in Adolf Hitlers Mein Kampf”. De Proverbio, vol. 3, Nr. 2: (elektronische Zeitschrift, derzeit nicht mehr frei zugänglich). Salvador, Vicent. 1989. “La metàfora nostra de cada dia”. Límits. Revista d‘assaig i d‘informació sobre les ciències del llenguatge, 6: 23–41. Sinclair, John. 1992. “The Automatic Analysis of Corpora”. In Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 82, Stockholm, 4–8 August 1991, J. Svartvik (Hg.), 379–397. Berlin: de Gruyter. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Wotjak, Gerd. 2000. “No hay que estarse con los brazos cruzados. Algunas observaciones acerca del significado de expresiones idiomáticas verbales del español actual”. In Las lenguas de Europa: Estudios de fraseología, fraseografía y traducción, G. Corpas Pastor (Hg.), 185–196. Granada: Comares.

The relevance of utterer-centered linguistics to Translation Studies Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

This study aims at exploring the contributions of utterer-centered linguistics to an objective and anti-dogmatic view of translation. Developed by French linguist Antoine Culioli, this formalizing cognitive model relates linguistic units to extralinguistic reality, connecting the utterances to the subjects that produce them and thus laying the foundations for defining the necessary conditions not only of possible meanings, but also of actual ones. After a brief discussion of linguistics’ impact on Translation Studies, we illustrate, based on authentic translations and following Jacqueline Guillemin-Flescher’s lead, how such a framework could contribute to the understanding of language activity and to the systematic analysis of translation.

Keywords: linguistics, utterance, meaning, utterer-centered approach, speech situation

1. Introduction In the systematic analysis and scientific study of translation the crucial role of linguistics-oriented approaches is indisputable. However, although Translation Studies owes much to linguistics, there is an increasingly skeptical attitude towards the latter. Is this attitude justifiable or does it stem from a restrictive conception of linguistics? In this paper we shall first explore the reasons for the insufficient recognition of the role of linguistics in Translation Studies. This will be followed by a discussion of the relevance of the utterer-centered approach, as developed by Culioli (1990), to the systematic analysis of translation. Following the method of Guillemin-Flescher (1981, 2003), we will attempt to demonstrate, with the use of specific examples (authentic translations in the language pairs Greek and French, Greek and Spanish), how the adoption of a theoretical framework relating the utterer and the utterance can clarify some aspects

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

of the translation process, and consequently provide a powerful tool for increasing the translator’s competence.

2. Linguistics and Translation Studies: a general survey Linguistics, including specific models such as transformational, functional or systemic grammar, has contributed considerably to the development and establishment of Translation Studies as an academic discipline and field of knowledge. Analyses such as those proposed by Vinay and Darbelnet (1958), Mounin (1963), Nida (1964) and Catford (1965) in the 1950s and 1960s, although concentrating on the word or phrase level, are considered significant for having led to the rejection of empiricism and thus to a more systematic approach to the study of translation. But even when the inadequacy of word and phrase level taxonomies became evident, the influence of linguistics remained substantial. Following the advances in language sciences, theorists tended to adopt concepts from other levels of linguistic analysis, such as register, discourse and pragmatic analysis, in order to explain translation as process or product (see for example Hatim and Mason 1990, 1997; Bell 1991; Baker 1992). However, linguistics is no longer perceived as contributing sufficiently to the study of the translation phenomenon. According to Fawcett (1997: i, 1998: 120), the relationship between the two fields is now “uncertain, full of tensions and disagreements”; it is regarded as a “love and hate relationship”. Indeed, recent developments rarely focus on, or even refer to, the relation between language activity and the act of translating. In order to give an independent epistemological status to the new discipline, scholars very often underestimate, or even neglect linguistics. At the same time, it is important to note that many of those most vehemently opposed to the use of linguistics in translation are also those who either implicitly or explicitly use basic linguistic tenets in their theoretical works. When, for example, the representatives of the interpretive approach distinguish between the linguistic meaning of a word or a phrase and its sense in a given text (Lederer 1994: 89), they are applying text-linguistic principles.1 Furthermore, they consider that comprehension of a source text, the first of the three stages (comprehension – reformulation – verification) involved in the translation process, requires the definition of “the conceptual content of an utterance by drawing on the referential context in which it is embedded” (Delisle, cited in Salama-Carr 1998: 113). Yet how can utterance and referential context be defined without a reference to the enunciation concept of Benveniste (1974: 80)?2 Moreover, is it possible, during the translating process, to associate conceptual content with referential context while bypassing language itself? In addition, given the fact that the referent of any linguistic feature exists per se, independent of language activity, it is difficult to elucidate, through the referent, the process leading up to the meaning of an utterance to be translated. In fact, this process emerges from the way in which predicative relations, minimal rela-

The relevance of utter-centered linguistics to translation studies 

tions referring to notions (i.e. complex bundles of structured physical and cultural properties, consisting of a subject and a predicate), are organised on the utterance level.3 For example: (1) Bernard ne croyait ni à dieux ni à diables. (Quéneau, Un rude hiver, p. 35) ‘Bernard didn’t believe either in Gods or in devils.’ O Mπερνάρ δεν πίστευε ούτε σε Θεούς ούτε σε δαίμονες. (Βαρυχειμωνιά, p. 26) ‘Bernard didn’t believe either in Gods or in demons.’ Diables (devils), though it seems to have a meaning identical to that of διάβολοι in Greek, is translated as δαίμονες (demons). The plural Dieux (Gods) reminds us of Hellenic antiquity, in which there was an opposition between Gods and Demons; on the other hand, the singular number evokes the Judeo-Christian tradition. Thus, we have two different linguistic features (διάβολος/devil, διάβολοι/demons) independent of the same notional referent. However, if we consider the same utterance in the singular, there is no change in translation: (1a)

Bernard ne croyait ni à Dieu ni au diable. ‘Bernard didn’t believe either in God or in the devil.’ O Mπερνάρ δεν πίστευε ούτε στον Θεό ούτε στο διάβολο. ‘Bernard didn’t believe either in God or in the devil.’

Finally, the influence of linguistics is clear in both functional and intercultural approaches to translation, because basic principles such as situational conditions, language functions, context, and extratextual as well as intra-textual factors of communication are taken into account, and because language and culture are two related concepts.4 Considering these facts, it seems probable that the neglect of linguistics stems from the restricted conception that many scholars may have about the sciences of language, often referring to structuralist theories that regard natural languages as codes or systems, omitting the context, situation or subject-based frameworks.5 The opposition to linguistics arises from the false perceptions they have about how linguistics can lead to an appropriate analysis and explication of translation and translating. Assuming a prescriptive view of Translation Studies, linguistics is expected to provide for the translator a predetermined model, or even a theory, which would offer ready-made solutions to any kind of problem. However, the aim of linguistics, if we adopt Guillemin-Flescher’s reasoning (1981), is instead to isolate and systematise the translator’s practice. The objections raised against a linguistics-oriented approach to translation could be justifiable, if we considered linguistics as a science that tried to classify natural languages on the basis of their distribution or described them as a system of independent elements. But the objections are by no means justifiable if we consider linguistics as a science that studies the grounding of languages in situations, as we will see below. Certainly, linguistics is not the only way to account for the translation process, but it is one of the most resourceful. The relevance of linguistics to translation is in fact evident

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

within the nature of the translation phenomenon itself. As Pergnier (1981: 255) points out, “l’objet de la linguistique est le langage, et la traduction est l’une des manifestations de langage parmi d’autres”. It is now widely recognized that translation is not a simple process resulting from already existent equivalencies between the signs of two languages. Translating is not a process that replaces words by words or substitutes syntactic structures for other syntactic structures. It is, on the contrary, a mediated process of communication, a language activity during which the translator reconstructs the meaning of actualized utterances, that is to say sequences of words, which are endorsed by an utterer in a particular situation of utterance. Therefore, translation is an activity whose goal is to transfer the meaning of linguistic forms embedded in a specific speech situation in another language. It is an operation of recognition and representation of stable, analogic characteristics between languages. In other words, translation is possible due to a certain number of shared properties between the languages. As Jakobson (1959/2000: 116) has noted, “languages differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey”. Consequently, since the linguistic dimension needs to be taken into account in every systematic attempt to analyze the translation act, as well as in translator training, it is the particular type of linguistic approach to be applied that should be discussed. As the adopted linguistic models have proved to be inadequate in providing an efficient tool for translation theorists, and especially for practitioners, there arose a need for a framework that relates linguistic units and, by extension, a text that is subject to translation to extralinguistic reality.6 Such a framework should also take into consideration the relation between language and language activity, an activity that, according to Culioli (1995: 23), “produces and recognizes forms, in the abstract sense of the term and not in the morphological sense”.

3. The utterer-centered approach and translation The utterer-centered approach, elaborated by Culioli (1990) and applied in comparative studies of translated texts by Guillemin-Flescher (1981) and her followers, provides a powerful source of reflection. Culioli (1990: 72) considers language not as a system but as a meaningful representational activity, which “is only accessible through text sequences, that is, through patterns of markers which are themselves traces of underlying operations,” calculated relatively to the situation of utterance. He defines (1995: 12) linguistics as “the science whose object is language apprehended through the diversity of natural languages, and the diversity of texts, oral and written”. Its aim is not to construct a universal grammar, but “to re-construct, by a theoretical and formal process, the primitive notions, elementary operations, rules and schemata which generate grammatical categories and patterns specific to each language. In short, the goal is to find the invariants which found and regulate language activity, in all its richness and complexity” (Culioli: 1990: 179). As for the goal of a scientific study of translation,

The relevance of utter-centered linguistics to translation studies 

Guillemin-Flescher (1981, 2003) argues that it is to establish, from translators’ recurrent – and in some cases almost restricting – choices, the internalized criteria conditioning their activity. One of the main factors in the utterer-centered approach is that it is a usage-based one, focusing on utterances and not on sentences, dealing with meaning and syntax as inseparable features in actual texts. Meaning in situations is considered as the result of a number of cognitive operations developed between the utterer, the utterance and the referential domain. The point of reference, the origin in all analyses, is the speaker: I, when he speaks: now, where he speaks: here, in other words, the enunciative coordinates defining the situation of utterance.7 This is of particular importance for the formalization of the translation process. Theorists usually consider that the translation process involves more than one stage. For instance, Garnier (1985: 112) distinguishes between the recognition stage and the production stage; Roberts and Pergnier (1987: 396) see the stages of comprehension and re-expression; and Ballard (1993: 230) the stages of comprehension and reformulation. But how can recognition or comprehension of a text be defined? Is it a simple procedure involving the identification of signifieds, as in the case of dictionaries, or a more complicated one involving the way languages shape our perceptions of reality? According to Culioli (1990: 74), to recognize an utterance and by extension a text means “to construct, or rather to reconstruct, patterns of markers which are the traces of operations to which we have no access”. Thus, it could be argued that the noted differences or similarities between source and target texts are not subject to the translator’s free choices on the syntactic or semantic levels. On the contrary, they are imposed to a large extent by the way discourse is organized in each language; i.e. by the text itself and the specific operations that the linguistic features mark in each language within the scope of a particular act of utterance. The way the French marker y is translated into Greek confirms this point: (2) En 1540, deux cents familles marranes expulsées de Venise, y avaient trouvé un refuge et …(Nehama, Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, book 4, p. 97) ‘In 1540, two hundred Marrano families deported from Venice, had found refuge there and …’ Το 1540 διακόσιες οικογένειες Μαρράνων, που απελάθηκαν από τη Βενετία, είχαν βρει καταφύγιο εδώ και … (Iστορία των Iσραηλιτών της Σαλονίκης, volume 1, p. 454) ‘In 1540, two hundred Marrano families which were deported from Venice, had found refuge here and…’

(3) Il est désormais défendu aux Juifs de se rendre pour affaires dans cette ville maudite, d’y faire le commerce, d’y envoyer ou d’y acheter des marchandises et des denrées. (Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, book 4, p. 108) ‘It is from now on forbidden to Jews to go for business to this damned town, to trade there, to send there or to buy from there goods and foodstuff.’

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

Στο εξής απαγορεύεται στους Εβραίους να μεταβαίνουν για δουλειές σε αυτή την καταραμένη πόλη, να εμπορεύονται εκεί, να στέλνουν ή να αγοράζουν από εκεί εμπορεύματα και τρόφιμα. (Iστορία των Iσραηλιτών της Σαλονίκης, volume 1, p. 460) ‘It is from now forbidden to Jews to go for business to this damned town, to trade there, to send or to buy from there goods and foodstuff.’ The French spatial marker y operates the repetition of a spatial locator already defined by the text without, however, specifying the viewpoint of the utterer endorsing the utterance. Since Greek lacks an analogous linguistic feature operating in the same way, y is rendered by markers expressing clearly the relation installed by the utterer between the repeated locator and the site of spatial locations.8 In (2), since it indicates the space-locator of the narration, y is identified with the site of the spatial relation and is translated by εδώ [here]. In (3), on the other hand, y refers to a place differing from the locator-situation of the narration and is translated by εκεί [there]. Furthermore, Culioli (1995: 15) considers that linguistic models should attempt to find a certain level of homogeneity in languages displaying a high degree of heterogeneity. This would be of considerable benefit for translators, as they often have to deal with heterogeneous forms marking the same operation or, on the contrary, with homogeneous forms marking completely different operations. The way the French marker on is translated in Greek serves as a good example of the first case. Since there is no unique formal equivalent in Greek, on lends itself to a broad variety of translations: the passive form without agent, the passive impersonal phrase, the first person plural, the marker κανείς [one], or the third person plural. A study of translated texts calls up a number of regularities that cannot be the result of purely arbitrary decisions. The decisions are guided by the degree of determination of the referential value of the marker, according to the utterance and the context. Thus, before searching for the linguistic features likely to operate as on in the target language, the translator has to determine, with the aid of the context, the class of persons to which on refers. If this class is indefinite, though it includes the utterer, on acquires the value “me + others” and is translated by the first person plural, as in the examples below: (4) Souvenez-vous en prenant son nom, mon cher ami, qu’on vous le donne bien moins pour réjouir votre vanité, que pour... (Marivaux, L’île des esclaves, p. 429) ‘Remember by taking his name, my dear friend, that we give it to you less for delighting your conceit, than for…’ Nα θυμάστε, αγαπητέ μου, ότι δε σας δίνουμε το όνομά του για να κολακέψουμε τη ματαιοδοξία σας, αλλά για να τον τιμωρήσουμε για την αλαζονεία του. (Tο νησί των σκλάβων, p. 19) ‘You should remember, my dear friend, that we don’t give you his name in order to flatter your conceit, but in order to…’

The relevance of utter-centered linguistics to translation studies 

(5) … Votre esclavage, ou plutôt votre cours d’humanité, dure trois ans, au bout desquels on vous renvoie si …(L’île des esclaves, p. 430) ‘Your slavery, or rather your humanity class, lasts three years, after which we send you away if…’ … H σκλαβιά σας, ή καλύτερα η μαθητεία σας σε σχολή ανθρωπιάς, διαρκεί τρία χρόνια· μετά σας αφήνουμε να φύγετε, αν … (Tο νησί των σκλάβων, p. 21) ‘Your slavery, or better your studies in the school of humanity, lasts three years; after we let you go away if…’

(6) En général, comme on le voit par les responsa du temps, on a un grand respect pour... (Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, book 3, p. 79) ‘In general, as one sees it from the Responsa of the time, one has a great respect for …’ Γενικώς, όπως το βλέπουμε στις responsa της εποχής εκείνης, έχουν μεγάλο σεβασμό για... (Iστορία των Iσραηλιτών της Σαλονίκης, volume 1, p. 306) ‘Generally, as we see it in the Responsa of that period, they have as big respect for …’

If, on the other hand, on builds a class of persons that the utterer scans one by one without singling out any particular element, it is translated in Greek by κανείς (Delveroudi 1993 : 80): (7) Et le tout gratis, sans purgation ni saignée. Peut-on de la santé à meilleur compte ? (L’île des esclaves, p. 430) ‘And everything for free, without purgative or bleeding. Can one have health at a better price?’ Kαι όλα δωρεάν, χωρίς γιατρούς, και φάρμακα, […]. Mπορεί κανείς ν’αποκτήσει την υγειά του τόσο φτηνά ; (Tο νησί των σκλάβων, p. 22) ‘And everything for free, without medicines and drugs. Can one get his health so cheap?’

(8) On comprend sans peine avec quelle joie les Marranes se précipitent. (Histoire des Israélites de Salonique, book 3, p. 62). ‘We understand without effort into which pleasure the Marranoes rush.’ Εύκολα καταλαβαίνει κανείς με τι χαρά σπεύδουν οι Μαρράνες. (Iστορία των Iσραηλιτών της Σαλονίκης, volume 1, p. 295). ‘Easily one understands with what pleasure the Marranoes rush.’

(9)

Oui ; car quand on est le maître... (L’île des esclaves, p. 439) ‘Yes; because when you are the master …’ Nαι, γιατί όταν είναι κανείς αφεντικό … (Tο νησί των σκλάβων, p. 35) ‘Yes, because when is one the master…’

It follows that, as the preference shown by the utterer for one grammatical structure rather than another is not accidental, the translational choices are not accidental either; they are recurrent and can be generalized. Contrary to the examples given above,

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

however, there are cases, such as the αόριστος [simple past] tense, where same forms might mark different operations. For example: (10) Kαι τον πίστεψες βρε κυρά-Eκάβη; – Bεβαίως όχι! Ήμουν κι εγώ ένας άπιστος Θωμάς σαν και σένα. Ξέχασε το επώνυμο, σκέφτηκα και ρίχνει το άδικο στην Aγία. (Tο Tρίτο Στεφάνι, p. 77) ‘And you believed him Misses Ecavi? – Of course not! I was also a doubting Thomas as you are. He forgot the last name; I thought and blames the Saint.’ Et tu l’as cru vraiment, Ekavi? – Non, bien sûr! J’étais, moi aussi, incrédule, comme Thomas et comme toi. Le moine a oublié le nom de famille pensai-je, et rejette la faute sur la Sainte. (Tahtsis, Le troisième anneau, p. 91) Pero, bueno, Ecavi y tu le creíste? – Hombre! Claro que no! Entonces yo era un incrédulo Tomás, como tú. Pensé que se había olvidado el apellido y le echaba la culpa a Santa Anastasia. (La tercera boda, p. 78). ‘And you have really believed him Misses Ecavi? – Of course not. I was, me too, unbeliever, as Thomas and you. The monk has forgotten the last name I thought, and blames the Saint.’ (11) Έχει δίκιο η Eρασμία. Αμάρτησα κι ο Θεός με τιμωρεί και ούτω καθεξής. Ένα βράδυ μπήκα μεσ’ την κρεβατοκάμαρα μας και τον τσάκωσα γονατιστό μπροστά στο εικονοστάσι. (Tο Tρίτο Στεφάνι, p. 30). “Erasmia is right. I sinned and God punishes me,” and so on. One evening I entered our bedroom and I found him kneeling in front of the icons.’ “Erasmia a raison. J’ai pêché et Dieu me punit.” Et ainsi de suite. Un soir, en entrant dans notre chambre je le surpris agenouillé devant l’iconostase. (Le troisième anneau, p. 36). “Tiene razón Erasmía. He pecado y el Señor me castiga” y asi constantemente. Una noche al entrar al dormitorio me lo encontré arrodillado ante el iconostasio. (La tercera boda, p. 34). “Erasmia is right. I have sinned”. And so on. One evening entering our bedroom and I found him kneeling in front of the icons. As illustrated above, the locating operation marked by αόριστος is not always the same; it can be either an operation of differentiation or an operation of disconnection from the time of the utterance.9 In the first case, the event referred to by the verb is construed as taking place before the act of utterance but as nevertheless being linked to it, and it is translated by passé composé in French and by pretérito perfecto in Spanish. In the second one, the event referred to by the verb has no link with the act of utterance and is translated by passé simple in French and by pretérito indefinido in Spanish. Another point to consider is that the utterer-centered approach, being a consistent and pragmatic model, can make the translators understand that each language constitutes a semiotic system able to interpret any other semiotic system, and consequently

The relevance of utter-centered linguistics to translation studies 

any other language, irrespective of the differences that might exist between them on the predicative level. Here are two examples: (12)

Bureau des objets trouvés. ‘Office of found objects.’ Γραφείο απολεσθέντων αντικειμένων. ‘Office of lost objects.’

(13) Ξαφνικά της φάνηκε πως όλα εκείνα τα ευρήματα που ΄ταν στοιβαγμένα όπως όπως στις βιτρίνες και στα ράφια είχαν ζωντανέψει…(Fakinos, Κλεμμένη ζωή, p. 33). ‘All of a sudden she had the impression that all those findings which were piled somehow or other in the showcases and the shelves had come back to life…’ Soudain, il lui sembla que toutes ces modestes découvertes qui s’entassaient pêlemêle dans les vitrines et sur les étagères avaient pris vie … (La vie volée, p. 42). ‘All of a sudden she had the impression that all those modest findings which were piled helter-skelter in the showcases and the shelves had taken life…’ In (12) there is a cause-and-effect relationship (lose – find) presented in a different way in French and in Greek. The Greek predicate is constructed from a malefic perspective, from the “loser’s” viewpoint, with the second place of the predicative relation remaining empty. On the other hand, the French predicate is based on the whole predicative relation, from the “finder’s” advantageous viewpoint. In (13), we have in Greek the repetition of a linguistic feature (anaphoric adverb όπως όπως: somehow or other) translated by pêle-mêle (any old way, helter-skelter). This cyclic form functions as a qualitative operator of the predicative relation, and thus there is no extraction of a specific occurrence. If on the contrary, όπως (as) appears in speech on its own, it introduces a quantitative operation (έτσι όπως/as) of the predicative relation, extracting an occurrence of the notional domain, constituted by the abstracted occurrences of a given notion. By repeating the latter linguistic feature, the utterer runs over the whole notional domain without being able to distinguish a particular occurrence, and we end up with the identification of the linguistic future with itself, allowing the introduction of a high degree of qualitative indetermination and the assignment of the meaning pêle-mêle (any old way, helter-skelter) to the process. Indeed, despite the fact that linguistic organization varies from one language to the other, steady analogous features do exist beyond the diversity of categories and surface markers.

4. Conclusion It seems, therefore, that instead of neglecting linguistics, it would be much more productive to consider how the theoretical tenets arising from this particular field of knowledge could be used to better elucidate the complexity as well as the multidimensionality of translation. As Fawcett (1998: 124) notes, “modern linguistics clearly pro-

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou

vides powerful tools for the analysis and understanding of language, and these tools ought to be part of the competence of every translator.” There is no doubt that the utterer-centered approach would contribute greatly to the understanding of language as well as to the systematic analysis of the translation process for the following reasons: First, the utterer-centered approach, taking into account the operations marked by the speaker in producing an utterance, can aid translators in developing their ability to access meaning. As an approach identifying units of meaning, rather than units of linguistic form, it lays the foundations for defining the necessary conditions not only for possible meanings but also for actual meanings. Second, as it connects the utterances to the subjects that produce them, it can provide coherent theoretical tools that clarify the verbalized intention of the author/utterer of a text and thus relate the extralinguistic functionality of a text to its linguistic components. Finally, this framework could bring us closer not only to reaching an objective approach to translation, but to adopting an anti-dogmatic attitude regarding the way we translate as well. The emphasis would thus shift from “how” to “why”. Overcoming the ageold dichotomy of word and sense, translating is no longer regarded in antinomous terms, nor even perceived as a secondary communication, but as an act of meta-utterance.

Notes 1. M. Lederer (1994: 90), one of the main representatives of the interpretive approach, dedicates a whole chapter to pointing out the reasons for which translation should not be studied on a linguistic level. 2. By enunciation E. Benveniste means “activating a language by an individual usage act. […] is the very act of producing an utterance and not the text of the utterance. […]. This is the act of a speaker who mobilizes a language for his own use”. 3. A. Culioli (1990: 69) argues that: “A notion should not be equated with lexical labels or actual items. Notions are representations (…). It should be obvious that notions have a status of predicable entities and could be described as unfragmented solid wholes; but they are apprehended through occurrences, i.e. distinguished through separate events, broken down into units (…) with variable properties”. J. Bouscaren, J. Chuquet, and L. Danon-Boileau (1992: 6) note that a predicative relation is a kind of “skeleton utterance”, validated when the utterer considers it as valid to a given locator: ex. John will go to London next week. The utterer anticipates the validation of the relation <John – go to London> relative to the future time locator next week”. 4. K. Reiss (1981/2000: 164) in order to define the functional characteristics of text types, borrows K. Bühler’s three-way categorization of the functions of language. C. Nord (1997: 50) adopts a combination of the models elaborated by K. Bühler and R. Jakobson and establishes four basic textual functions. 5. M. Pergnier (1978: 7) notes that “l’usage qui est fait au terme linguistique, s’agissant des problèmes de la traduction, est la plupart du temps restrictif. La plupart des linguistes qui se sont attachés à étudier le problème de la traduction ont réduit celle-ci à l’aspect que Saussure appelait

The relevance of utter-centered linguistics to translation studies 

‘la linguistique de la langue’, et encore n’en ont-ils retenu que l’un des aspects : l’étude de la langue comme système”. 6. On the inadequacy of structuralist models see B. Hatim and I. Mason (1990: 26). 7. The term situation of utterance should be understood as referring to a linguistic concept not simply any particular situation. The two parameters concerned are the utterer and the time of utterance. Any situation of utterance can be defined in relation to these two terms. 8. The concept of location is linked to the idea of locating one term relative to another. A located term is one that has been situated, specified or determined. A. Culioli (1990: 180) notes that “to say that x is located relative to y, means that x is situated with reference to y, whether the latter, which is thus a locator is itself located by another location, or whether it itself is an origin”. 9. According to J. Bouscaren, J. Chuquet and L. Danon-Boileau (1992: 2): “Locating a verb relative to the time of utterance involves marking if the event referred to by the verb is taking place at the time when the utterer mentions it or at a different time”.

References Primary sources Fakinos, Aris. 1996. Kλεμμένη ζωή, Athens: Kastaniotis. *French Translation 1996: R. MajestéLarroy. La vie volée. Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard. Nehama, Joseph. 1935. Histoire des Israélites de Salonique. Salonique: Librairie Molho. *Greek Translation: Department of Translation 2000, School of French, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Iστορία των Iσραηλιτών της Σαλονίκης. Thessaloniki: University Studio Press. Marivaux, Pierre Carlet de Chamblain de. 1949 [1725]. L’île des esclaves. [Bibliothèque de la Pléiade]. Paris: Gallimard. *Greek Translation 1995: Z. Samara. Tο νησί των σκλάβων. Thessaloniki: University Studio Press. Quéneau, Raymond. 1986 [1939]. Un rude hiver. Paris: Gallimard. *Greek Translation 1984: L. Koukouvinou. Βαρυχειμωνιά. Athens: Grammata. Tahtsis, Kostas. 1986 [1963]. Tο τρίτο Στεφάνι. Athens: Ermis, *French Translation: J. Lacarrière. Le troisième anneau. Paris : Gallimard. 1967. *Spanish Translation 1987: N. Galvez. La tercera Boda. Madrid: Ediciones Alfaguara.

Secondary sources Baker, Mona. 1992. In Other Words. A Coursebook on Translation. London and New York: Routledge. Ballard, Michel. 1993. “L’unité de traduction. Essai de redéfinition d’un concept”. In La traduction à l’université. Recherches et propositions didactiques, M. Ballard (ed.), 223–262. Lille: Presses Universitaires. Bell, Roger. 1991. Translation and Translating. Theory and Practice. London & New York: Longman. Benveniste, Emile. 1974. Problèmes de linguistique générale, Volumes I and II. Paris: Gallimard.

 Simos Grammenidis & Tonia Nenopoulou Bouscaren, Janine, Chuquet, Jean and Danon-Boileau, Laurent. 1992. Introduction to a Linguistic grammar of English. An utterer-centered approach, translated and adapted by R. Flintham and J. Bouscaren. Le Gap: Ophrys. Catford, John C. 1965. Linguistic Theory of Translation. An Essay in Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press. Culioli, Antoine. 1990. Pour une Linguistique de l’énonciation, Tome 1. Le Gap: Ophrys. Culioli, Antoine. 1995. Cognition and Representation in Linguistic Theory, Texts selected and introduced by M. Liddle. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Delveroudi, Rhéa. 1993. “Le sujet générique – animé humain en grec moderne”. In Linguistique Contrastive et Traduction, J. Guillemin-Flescher (ed.) T. 2., 35–88. Le Gap: Ophrys. Fawcett, Peter. 1997. Translation and Language: Linguistic Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome. Fawcett, Peter. 1998. “Linguistic approaches”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, M. Baker (ed.), 120–124. London and New York: Routledge. Garnier, Georges. 1985. Linguistique et traduction; éléments de systématique verbale comparée du français et de l’anglais. Paris: Paradigme. Guillemin-Flescher, Jacqueline. 1981. Syntaxe comparée du français et de l’anglais. Le Gap: Ophrys. Guillemin-Flescher, Jacqueline. 2003. “Théoriser la traduction”. Revue Française de Linguistique appliquée, vol. 2: 7–18. Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London and New York: Longman. Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian. 1997. The Translator as Communicator. London & New York: Routledge. Jakobson, Roman. 2000 [1959]. “On linguistic aspects of translation”. In The Translation Studies Reader, L. Venuti (ed.), 113–118. London & New York: Routledge. Lederer, Marianne. 1994. La traduction aujourd’hui. Le modèle interprétatif. Paris: Hachette. Mounin, Georges. 1963. Les problèmes théoriques de la traduction. Paris: Gallimard. Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introduction to Translation Studies. Theories and Applications. London & New York: Routledge. Nida, Eugene A. 1964. Toward a science of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Nord, Christiane. 1997. “A Functional Typology of Translations”. In Text Typology and Translation, A. Trosborg (ed.), 43–66. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pergnier, Maurice. 1978. Les fondements sociolinguistiques de la traduction. Paris: Honoré Champion. Pergnier, Maurice. 1981. “Théorie Linguistique et théorie de la Traduction”. META, vol. 26, no 3: 255–262. Reiss, Katharina. 2000 [1981]. “Type, Kind and Individuality of Text. Decision making in translation”. In The Translation Studies Reader, L. Venuti (ed.), 160–171. London & New York: Routledge. Roberts, Roda and Pergnier, Michel. 1987. “L’ équivalence en traduction”. META 32 (4): 392– 402. Montréal: Presses Universitaires. Salama-Carr, Myriam. 1998. “Interpretive approach”. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, M. Baker (ed.), 112–114. London & New York: Routledge. Vinay, Jean-Paul and Jean Darbelnet. 1958. Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais. Méthode de traduction. Paris: Didier.

part 5

Literature-based

De la question de la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote Marc Charron Université du Québec en Outaouais, Canada

The readability of literary work, notably of classics, does not present itself in the same way for original texts and their translations. For a translated text, readability is both the feature to which we attach the greatest importance and the one that inscribes the text in the history of literature, within a given temporality, within an evanescence (that is, a translated version of an original text gradually becomes obsolete before it is replaced by another translation). In the case of translating classics, readability must be understood as the expression, for the reader, of a relation to this history of literature, but also as a form of otherness, which, of course, is the other language (the language of the original) or the reader’s own language…at another time in history. Among the texts that best problematize the question of readability in regard to classics, are the translations of Don Quixote, in particular the 20th-century French translations of Cervantes’s masterpiece.

Keywords: Don Quixote, translation of classical texts, readability, literalness, modernizing translation, archaizing translation

1. Problématique Nous voudrions interroger quelques idées reçues ayant trait à la retraduction des classiques, et ce, notamment, en prenant pour point de départ certains critères dont on se sert en linguistique pragmatique pour parler de la « lisibilité » des textes.1 À notre avis, il y a tout lieu, à partir de cette notion, de poser la question de la compréhensibilité ou de l’accessibilité2 des textes classiques en traduction, ici le Don Quijote en français. La difficile compréhensibilité des classiques n’est pas, en études littéraires, une problématique qu’on aborde fréquemment, même avec des textes qui remontent à plusieurs siècles.3 Et pourtant, cette supposée difficulté au sujet des versions traduites de

 Marc Charron

ces mêmes classiques n’étonne pas, voire semble presque aller de soi. C’est tellement vrai que, de tous les facteurs évoqués par les traducteurs eux-mêmes pour justifier une nouvelle version d’une œuvre originale ancienne, on la mentionne souvent parmi les premiers commentaires. Des différences qui existent entre les textes originaux et les textes traduits, il faudrait donc compter celle qui a trait à la notion de lisibilité (au sens donné à ce terme ci-dessous), phénomène qui s’appliquerait uniquement aux traductions, ces dernières étant les seules, assez étrangement, qu’on aborde comme s’il s’agissait de textes dont la langue aurait vieilli (par opposition à la langue d’une œuvre originale dont on ira parfois jusqu’à moderniser la ponctuation ou l’orthographe, mais rarement beaucoup plus).4 Selon cette logique, c’est comme si le texte traduit renfermait, contrairement (encore une fois) à celle de l’œuvre originale, une accessibilité qu’il faudrait qualifier de temporaire, d’expirable. Cette conception traditionnelle relative aux textes traduits doit être interrogée, mais uniquement si on dédouble cette réflexion d’un examen selon que la traduction est jugée lisible tantôt par le lecteur expert,5 tantôt par celui qu’on appelle parfois, dans les préfaces des traducteurs contemporains des textes classiques, le « lecteur d’aujourd’hui ».6 Il y a donc lieu de croire qu’on peut jeter un éclairage différent sur cette question de l’accessibilité des traductions, à condition de l’aborder autrement que dans une perspective où la langue des textes en traduction est dite vieillie en regard de celle des œuvres originales qui, elles, contrairement aux traductions, ne subiraient pas le même sort. Ce faisant, on cesserait de poser la question en termes de rythme auquel les traductions deviennent caduques, pour se pencher entre autres sur le type de lectorat pour lequel ces mêmes traductions tombent prétendument, pour ainsi dire, en caducité ou en désuétude.7 D’ailleurs, les auteurs de nouvelles traductions de textes qui datent ne font-ils pas habituellement valoir que leur version s’adresse au lecteur d’aujourd’hui dans sa propre langue, plutôt que dans une langue qui appartient à une autre époque? Et si la lisibilité d’un texte traduit pour les lecteurs d’aujourd’hui change, en quelque sorte, plus rapidement que la même lisibilité pour les lecteurs experts, c’est sans doute parce que ces derniers trouvent ou cherchent à établir dans les textes traduits un rapport avec le passé de l’œuvre originale, mais aussi avec l’histoire de la langue qui traverse cette même œuvre. Correspond à ces appréciations distinctes d’une telle lisibilité soit une position de « traduction archaïsante » (qui tend vers une autre langue appartenant à une autre époque), soit une position de « traduction modernisante » (qui tend vers la langue contemporaine du lecteur d’aujourd’hui).8 La traductologie n’a pas encore beaucoup posé la question de la lisibilité des traductions de ce point de vue, le seul capable à notre avis de contrer une approche qui a certes mythifié l’histoire des œuvres originales et qui a très peu contribué, en définitive, à éclairer cette même histoire en traduction.

De la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote 

2. La traduction de Don Quijote et le «lecteur d’aujourd’hui» Tel est justement le contexte dans lequel a paru à l’automne 2001, dans la « Bibliothèque de la Pléiade » chez Gallimard, la très médiatisée nouvelle traduction de Claude Allaigre, Jean Canavaggio et Michel Moner de Don Quijote. De l’aveu même de Jean Cana vaggio, il ressort clairement que l’une des principales raisons ayant motivé ce projet de retraduction a été la volonté de présenter un texte qui viendrait remplacer une version antérieure jugée désuète et dont la langue avait trop vieilli (la version antérieure étant dans ce cas-ci celle de Jean Cassou, qui remontait à 1934 et qui avait été publiée en 1949 dans la même collection, se proposant comme une version « revue, corrigée et annotée » de la toute première traduction française de Don Quijote, à savoir celle de César Oudin pour la Première partie en 1614 et celle de François de Rosset pour la Deuxième partie en 1618). Canavaggio (2001 : lxxii-lxxiii) s’en explique ainsi: Si nous n’avons pas suivi Jean Cassou dans sa démarche, c’est qu’au terme de plus d’un demi-siècle le travail des premiers traducteurs [Oudin et de Rosset], tout en continuant de retenir l’attention du spécialiste, déconcerte en revanche le lecteur d’aujourd’hui : plus éloigné du français classique qu’on ne l’était il y a près de soixante-dix ans, ce dernier, plutôt que de déchiffrer un texte plus ardu, sinon plus opaque, que l’original espagnol, souhaite disposer d’une version accessible.

Ce commentaire peut étonner quelque peu, non pas tellement parce que la traduction d’Oudin et de Rosset ou ses particularités linguistiques « déconcerte[rait] le lecteur d’aujourd’hui », ni non plus parce qu’elle continuerait de « retenir l’attention du spécialiste »9 mais par son sous-entendu: le texte d’Oudin et de Rosset, même une fois revu et corrigé par Cassou, serait à ce point éloigné du lecteur d’aujourd’hui qu’il rend nécessaire une nouvelle traduction en 2001, alors que le « français classique », toujours selon la terminologie de Canavaggio, aurait encore été tout à fait accessible au lecteur des années 1930. Le commentaire de Canavaggio suppose aussi qu’il aurait été impensable de répéter en 2001 l’expérience de Cassou de 1934 (c’est-à-dire de revoir et de corriger la première traduction d’Oudin et de Rosset), à cause du prétendu fossé entre ce que Canavaggio appelle la « langue littéraire d’aujourd’hui »10 et celle du XVIIe siècle, entre le lecteur du début du XXIe siècle et le français classique. Plus encore, son commentaire implique que le lecteur des années 1930 ait été assez près du français classique pour qu’on ait trouvé tout à fait lisible (en 1934), une version simplement revue et corrigée d’une traduction vieille de plus de 300 ans; autrement dit, assez près pour que ce lecteur d’il y a à peine trois ou quatre générations ait trouvé accessible, compréhensible, lisible une simple révision d’un texte datant du début du XVIIe siècle plutôt qu’une nouvelle traduction en bonne et due forme. Autre chose étonne aussi dans le commentaire de Canavaggio: l’idée selon laquelle une version française de Don Quijote trouvant son origine dans le français classique du XVIIe siècle mais néanmoins produite il y a 70 ans, en plein XXe siècle, soit perçue comme étant difficilement compréhensible pour le lecteur du début du XXIe siècle. En fait, non seulement la parution d’une nouvelle traduction de Don Quijote dans la « Bi-

 Marc Charron

bliothèque de la Pléiade » à l’automne 2001 vient-elle en quelque sorte soulever la question du statut de prestige que détenait jusqu’alors la révision-correction de Cassou, mais elle vient également soulever la question de ce qu’il convient d’appeler de façon générale la lisibilité même de Don Quijote en traduction française et, plus généralement, la question de la lisibilité de versions qui remontent à peine à quelques générations. Loin de nous attarder sur la question du vieillissement des traductions (question qui, on le sait, découle d’une fausse prémisse), il nous faut montrer que la caractérisation des rapports avec l’original se trouve exemplifiée dans les traductions de Don Quijote là où la lisibilité exprime précisément une mise en rapport avec une autre langue (celle de l’ oeuvre originale à une autre époque), mais aussi avec une langue autre (celle de la traduction à une autre époque). Ainsi, malgré son intention avouée de rendre Don Quijote accessible au lecteur d’aujourd’hui, Canavaggio ne situe pas pour autant sa traduction dans le camp des versions modernisantes11 qui ont vu le jour en français et en anglais ces dernières années.12 Pour les tenants du courant plus archaïsant auquel il faudrait inévitablement associer la traduction d’Allaigre, Canavaggio et Moner, il s’agit plutôt de montrer en quoi la modernité du texte fondateur du genre romanesque est d’abord historique. Dans les termes de Canavaggio (2001 : lxxiv), l’option privilégiée par lui et ses collègues est celle qui permet le mieux « de respecter la spécificité de textes qui, au terme de près de quatre siècles, ont acquis une patine dont on ne saurait les dépouiller si l’on veut préserver […] ce regard particulier qu’exige du lecteur d’aujourd’hui toute œuvre du passé ». Et cette exigence, selon Canavaggio, ne peut être remplie si l’on se distancie trop du texte de départ au profit d’une tentative de facilitation de la lecture. Par exemple, même si Canavaggio va jusqu’à dire (2001 : lxxiii) de la traduction de 1837 de Louis Viardot qu’«elle a […] assez bien résisté à l’épreuve du temps » et que Viardot « a su conférer à sa traduction un allant qui, aujourd’hui encore, entraîne le lecteur », il s’empresse toutefois de préciser que Viardot « n’y est parvenu qu’en prenant d’assez larges libertés avec l’original espagnol ». Mais en affirmant cela, c’est comme si Canavaggio établissait, sans toutefois le reconnaître explicitement, un rapport inversement proportionnel entre la résistance au temps qui s’écoule et le degré de liberté prise avec le texte à traduire (facteur qui devrait également intéresser l’examen de la question de la lisibilité). Canavaggio va même (2001 : lxxiii) jusqu’à saluer le courage des auteurs de l’entreprise de traduction qu’il juge la plus « arbitraire » que Don Quijote ait jamais connu en français, tout en soulignant avec insistance ce qu’il estime en être la naïveté : Il faut comprendre comme une réaction contre une telle tendance [qu’on pourrait qualifier de cibliste et qui est exemplifiée dans l’histoire du Don Quijote en français par la traduction de Louis Viardot] la revendication d’un idéal dont on sait aujourd’hui qu’il n’est qu’un mirage : restituer le texte original au mot près, à travers un jeu d’équivalences posé comme une manière de norme, mais qui, en fait, est on ne peut plus arbitraire. C’est ainsi que Jean Labarthe et Xavier de Cardaillac ont publié, au lendemain de la Première Guerre, un Don Quijote qui aspire à nous donner une transposition exacte de chaque mot : tentative louable, mais qui re-

De la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote 

pose sur une critère inapplicable – celui du décalque – et qui aboutit, en dernière instance, à un texte généralement plat […].

A ce choix qui repose sur l’inapplicabilité du procédé de traduction dit du « décalque » correspond un autre choix, écrit Canavaggio (2001 : lxxiii-lxxiv): Ce constat d’échec [celui de l’entreprise de Labarthe et Cardaillac] explique un choix diamétralement opposé : plutôt que de suivre pas à pas la lettre de l’original cervantin, en retrouver l’esprit dans une version plus rigoureuse que celle qu’avait conçue naguère Viardot, mais forgée dans le creuset d’un français vivant, celui que nous lisons, écrivons et parlons et, comme telle, conforme à nos mœurs comme à l’attente de nos contemporains. C’est cette attente qu’ont voulu satisfaire Francis de Miomandre, il y a plus d’un demi-siècle, et, récemment, Aline Schulman […] Cette dernière version […] manifeste assurément la vitalité du chef-d’œuvre de Cervantès; mais cette vitalité autorise tout pareillement notre projet […].

Ainsi, la traduction d’Allaigre, Canavaggio et Moner se distinguerait à la fois de la révision-correction de Cassou et de la traduction prétendument « décalquée » (suivant Canavaggio) de Labarthe et Cardaillac, mais pour des raisons complètement différentes. Même s’il s’inscrit dans un courant que Lefere qualifierait de version « résolument archaïsante »13 de Don Quijote, Canavaggio tient à préciser que la traduction ne peut se réaliser au prix d’un laborieux exercice de déchiffrement ou d’une tentative irréaliste de vouloir reproduire l’original. Dans les deux cas, le problème que soulève Canavaggio est bel et bien celui de ce qu’il estime être la difficile accessibilité ou compréhensibilité des traductions de Cassou et de Labarthe et Cardaillac. Pour tout dire, Canavaggio est beaucoup moins sévère à l’endroit des traductions plus modernisantes de Don Quijote, que ce soit d’abord celle de Viardot, mais surtout d’autres traductions du XXe siècle, comme celle de Francis de Miomandre (1935) et d’Aline Schulman (1997). Toutefois au sujet de cette traduction d’Aline Schulman, la principale réserve formulée par Canavaggio (2001 : lxxiv) concerne l’oralité et le degré, en traduction, de ce qu’il appelle la «modernité » des « effets propres à la langue littéraire d’aujourd’hui »: [T]ranposer ces effets [il est fait référence ici à la façon dont Cervantes exploite les ressources de la langue parlée] dans la langue littéraire d’aujourd’hui, une langue « parlée telle qu’au théâtre et non dans la rue » [c’est là le projet de Schulman selon les propres mots de la traductrice], pour en restituer la modernité, risque de compromettre l’indispensable distance que le lecteur d’aujourd’hui doit garder vis-àvis d’un texte devenu classique, s’il ne veut pas, en lui ôtant sa patine, le priver de son charme.

Certes, au moment où certaines traductions d’une œuvre originale cessent d’être lues parce que ces versions ne sont plus jugées suffisamment accessibles (a priori par les traducteurs de nouvelles versions), il est des préoccupations et caractérisations qui cessent alors de se poser. L’une des premières conséquences, c’est que la lecture inter-

 Marc Charron

prétative de l’œuvre originale perd à son tour en traductibilité, en ce sens qu’on assiste dès lors à la disparition effective de possibilités qui ajoutaient jusque-là une certaine épaisseur à cette œuvre et permettaient d’aborder ses nouvelles traductions autrement qu’en tant que projets issus de l’hypothétique et difficilement vérifiable vieillissement de la langue en traduction. Il faut comprendre que la lisibilité, en ce sens, est une problématique linguistique qui, même si elle « ne concerne ni le sens du texte ni sa structure argumentaire, mais seulement les indices de surface du texte » dans le cas des textes pragmatiques14, relèvera néanmoins dans ce cas-ci de la traductibilité de l’œuvre.

3. Pour une analyse de la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote Dans le cadre proposé ci-dessus, il importe d’entamer cette analyse de la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote et surtout d’établir les critères d’un modèle d’une telle analyse. Il importerait, comme première étape, de déterminer en quoi consiste l’opération et l’étendue de la révision-correction de Cassou de 1934, mais aussi de déterminer quelle pouvait être la nature (réelle ou perçue) de la lisibilité de la traduction d’Oudin et de Rosset (1614–1618) pour justifier, il y a 70 ans, ce projet de révision-correction. Cette étude comparée entre la traduction d’Oudin et de Rosset et la révisioncorrection de Cassou conduirait ainsi à l’amorce de l’analyse de la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote, car seul ce type d’exercice permettrait justement de dire en quoi les modifications apportées par Cassou relèvent de critères relatifs à sa conception de la lisibilité de la toute première traduction pour un lecteur des années 1930. La seconde étape consisterait en l’analyse détaillée du degré réel de « décalque » de la traduction de Labarthe et Cardaillac (1923–1926). De façon générale, nous avons été à même de constater que la littéralité effective des traductions françaises d’un autre classique du Siècle d’or espagnol contemporain Don Quijote, à savoir le Lazarillo de Tormes, ne doit pas mener à l’hypothèse d’une nécessaire correspondance entre le degré de lisibilité linguistique et celui de la littéralité (cf. Charron 2002 et 2003). Enfin, la troisième et dernière étape d’un tel projet consisterait en l’analyse de la lisibilité de la version d’Allaigre, Canavaggio et Moner. L’objectif ici serait de déterminer si une traduction qui dit « respecter la spécificité de textes qui, au terme de près de quatre siècles, ont acquis une patine dont on ne saurait les dépouiller »15 tout en voulant afficher une lisibilité différente de celles de Cassou et de Labarthe et Cardaillac (dénoncées respectivement comme « opaque » et « arbitraire » par Canavaggio) peut, en définitive, offrir une lisibilité autre que segmentée, c’est-à-dire où la traduction sera jugée accessible tantôt par l’ensemble des lecteurs d’aujourd’hui, tantôt par les lecteurs experts seulement? L’hypothèse d’une lisibilité des traductions qui diffère suivant le type de lectorat suppose des différends ou tout au moins des éléments de complémentarité entre le texte d’Allaigre, Canavaggio et Moner, la traduction de Cardaillac et Labarthe, la révi-

De la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote 

sion-correction de Cassou et la toute première traduction d’Oudin et de Rosset. Et il n’est possible de répondre aux objectifs précis de nos trois étapes que si ces écarts ou différends sont d’abord confrontés entre eux à la fois dans les diverses analyses comparées proposées des traductions (menées en regard de l’original), mais aussi à l’aune de l’imposant appareil critique sur le texte original de Don Quijote. Aussi faut-il privilégier une approche théorique de ces traductions où celles-ci contribuent à la traductibilité de l’œuvre, qu’il faut comprendre, comme on l’a vu, en tant qu’ensemble des différends qui expliquent que celle-ci puisse être sans cesse réinterprétée et retraduite. En ce sens, la méthode d’analyse des traductions que nous proposons n’est pas traditionnelle (c’est-à-dire qu’elle ne se veut pas prescriptive) mais s’inscrit davantage dans une volonté de théorisation des écarts et différends afin de révéler la nécessaire tension entre des traductions qui se contredisent tout en se répondant les unes les autres. Afin qu’une telle analyse puisse se réaliser en s’appuyant sur des principes traductologiques qui rendent opératoire l’étude des rapports entre traductions multiples et textes critiques, elle doit à notre avis faire sienne, entre autres, la notion de « traduction comme lecture interprétative et critique du texte de départ, »16 mais aussi celle de «surinterprétation» du déconstructionniste Jonathan Culler (1992 : 113–114), qui écrit dans «In Defence of Overinterpretation»:17 « What Umberto Eco calls overinterpretation may in fact be a practice of asking precisely those questions which are not necessary for normal communications but which enable us to reflect on its functioning »; et qui ajoute : If interpretation is reconstruction of the intention of the text, then these [questions the text does not encourage one to ask about it] are questions that don’t lead that way; they ask about what the text does and how: how it relates to other texts and to other practices; what it conceals or represses; what it advances or is complicitous with. Many of the most interesting forms of modern criticism ask not what the work has in mind but what it forgets, not what it says but what it takes for granted.

Enfin, notre analyse doit recourir à la stylistique de l’ambiguïté et de la syllepse au sens de Michael Riffaterre (1980) 18, ces deux composantes stylistiques, qui se manifestent bien souvent sous la forme d’agrammaticalités et d’incohérences, étant de loin les plus susceptibles de cerner adéquatement la problématique entourant toute la question de la lisibilité des textes traduits telle que nous l’avons esquissée ici.

4. Conclusion Pour conclure, nous insisterons sur le fait que notre analyse doit finalement reposer sur le repérage des caractéristiques les plus aptes à faire ressortir les limites ou l’étendue de la lisibilité des textes traduits, soit les caractéristiques dialogiques et syntaxiques: i) dialogiques 19 car ce sont dans les dialogues, sous-dialogues et discours rapportés que serait le plus repérable la volonté de présenter, au lecteur d’aujourd’hui, un texte dont la langue se rapproche de la sienne, notre objectif étant ici de voir dans quelle mesure

 Marc Charron

les traductions françaises du XXe siècle reflètent ou non cette volonté; et ii) syntaxiques (dont les caractéristiques relatives aux manifestations d’agrammaticalités et d’incohérences au sens de Riffaterre), car ce sont les tournures syntaxiques, plus que tout autre aspect du langage, qui sont amenées à soulever, encore une fois, la question même de la lisibilité.20 En définitive, afin de montrer en quoi consiste la réelle histori cité entourant le phénomène de retraduction de Don Quijote en français (notamment au XXe siècle), il importe avant toute chose d’interroger la pertinence d’une approche traductologique qui a privilégié jusqu’ici une lecture analytique des traductions ayant trop souvent abordé et résolu la question de la lisibilité linguistique de versions antérieures (parfois plus ou moins anciennes) en se limitant à des facteurs prétendument liés au vieillissement de la langue. Nous estimons plutôt que toute autre doit être la direction (ou du moins l’une des directions) que doit prendre l’analyse de la lisibilité des traductions de Don Quijote, au lendemain de son 400e anniversaire.

Notes 1. Voir, par exemple, http://www.ling.uqam.ca/sato/publications/biblographie/C3lisib.htm. De façon�� générale, chez les spécialistes de l’analyse des textes pragmatiques, le concept de lisibilité « renvoie à la plus ou moins grande difficulté de lecture d’un texte en fonction, entre autres, du type de vocabulaire utilisé (par exemple, vocabulaire connu ou inconnu) et de la longueur des phrases du texte. En d’autres termes, le concept de lisibilité ne concerne ni le sens du texte ni sa structure argumentaire, mais seulement les indices de surface du texte. » Plus encore, « [l’indice de lisibilité] désigne, en ATO [analyse des textes par ordinateur], des mesures d’ordre numérique permettant d’apprécier la difficulté ou la facilité de lecture, de compréhension et de mémorisation d’un texte ou des parties d’un texte. Ces mesures sont calculées à partir de paramètres comme la longueur des mots, la longueur des phrases, l’usage de certaines constructions de phrase (par exemple, l’emploi excessif des pronoms relatifs (ou autres).» http://www.ling. uqam.ca/sato/glossaire/glos_1.htm#lisibilite 2. On comprendra que les termes de « compréhensibilité », d’ « accessibilité » et de « lisibilité » renvoient, pour les fins de cet article, à la même notion et que vont également en ce sens les précisions terminologiques de la note 1. 3. Tout au plus, la problématique est-elle évoquée en contexte d’édition par le fait que ces textes paraissent habituellement accompagnés d’un appareil paratextuel de notes, de gloses, etc., sans qu’on touche réellement aux « indices de surface du texte ». 4. On qualifierait ce phénomène de « modernisation minimale », suivant Robin Lefere (1994: 242). La modernisation des traductions, quant à elle, peut aller et va généralement beaucoup plus loin. Voir, par exemple, les commentaires suivants des deux traducteurs les plus récents de Don Quijote en français, c’est-à-dire Jean Canavaggio et Aline Schulman : « [L]e souci qui a prévalu a été d’atteindre à une parfaite lisibilité en souscrivant simultanément à une double exigence : d’une part, rapprocher les textes anciens du lecteur moderne, d’autre part permettre à ce lecteur de remonter vers des faits de langue et des codes qu’il redécouvre ou même découvre pour son plaisir » (Canavaggio (2001 : lxxv); c’est nous qui soulignons); et « Dépoussiérer, alléger le texte, comme on

De la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote 

a pu le dire, en le modernisant, cela signifie, en somme, respecter, renforcer la part d’oralité […] au lieu de donner du texte une image figée en calquant la phrase française sur la structure de la phrase espagnole du XVIIe siècle. Cela suppose, quand il y a lieu, d’opter pour un énoncé accessible plutôt que pour un archaïsme ronflant, de remplacer une coordination par un point; d’élaguer les redondances […] » (Schulman (1997 : 25); c’est nous qui soulignons). 5.

Celui que Robin Lefere (1994 : 243) appelle le « philologue-historien ».

6. Comme on le constatera ici, il s’agit du terme qu’utilise Jean Canavaggio dans la « Note à la présente édition » qui précède la traduction parue chez Gallimard en 2001. 7. Il faut comprendre ici que les textes traduits cessent d’être lisibles ou d’afficher une lisibilité certaine pour le lectorat non spécialiste de façon beaucoup plus récurrente que pour le lectorat spécialiste, c’est-à-dire lorsque le lecteur d’aujourd’hui se heurte dans le texte traduit à une langue qu’il ne reconnaît plus comme sienne. 8. Robin Lefere (1994 : 242) écrit à ce sujet : « La traduction d’un texte du passé est nécessairement modernisante ou archaïsante. Est en principe archaïsante toute traduction qui ne se fait pas dans une langue strictement moderne, ce qui n’exclut pas dans les faits, qu’une traduction soit à la fois modernisante et archaïsante (il s’agirait même du cas de traduction archaïsante le plus fréquent […]) » 9. Ne serait-il pas de toute évidence logique que cela soit effectivement le cas d’un texte datant du début du XVIIe siècle? 10. Voir la citation sur la modernité et les ressources de la langue parlée à la fin de cette section 2. 11. Par version modernisante, nous faisons ici référence à ce que Canavaggio (2001 : lxxiiilxxiv) qualifie de « version […] forgée dans le creuset d’un français vivant, celui que nous lisons, écrivons et parlons et, comme telle, conforme à nos mœurs comme à l’attente de nos contemporains ». Pour une typologie des divers degrés d’archaïsation possibles de la traduction, on se référera à l’article de Robin Lefere déjà cité. 12. Nous pensons ici à la traduction française d’Aline Schulman publiée au Seuil en 1997 ainsi qu’à la traduction anglaise de Burton Raffel publiée chez Norton en 1994, à la traduction de John Rutherford parue chez Penguin en 2001 et à celle d’Edith Grossman (entre autres traductrice de Gabriel García Márquez, d’Álvaro Mutis, de Juan Goytisolo et d’autres auteurs hispanophones contemporains) publiée en 2003 chez HarperCollins. 13. La traduction « résolument archaïsante », selon Lefere (1994 : 243), peut être soit « strictement archaïsante (un seul état de langue, synchronique ou non par rapport au texte original) », soit « librement archaïsante (plusieurs états de langue, avec généralement un état dominant) ». 14. On se doutera bien que toute affirmation qui oppose ainsi le sens (et dans une moindre mesure la structure argumentaire) d’un texte et ses indices de surface est, peu importe le type de texte, sujette à contestation. 15. Ce sont là, faut-il le rappeler, les termes mêmes de Canavaggio. 16. Il s’agit là de la notion centrale dans Marilyn Gaddis Rose (1997), ouvrage dans lequel la traductologue américaine associe très étroitement la pratique traduisante et l’analyse littéraire, voire les confond positivement (cf. le sous-titre du livre: Translation as Analysis, et le titre courant en haut de page: Translation as Literary Criticism). Rose cherche à y montrer que la traduction présente non pas tant des analogies avec certaines méthodes d’analyse littéraire, mais plutôt qu’elle en constitue une des formes à privilégier, et donc à y établir les raisons qui justifient l’intervention critique de la traduction en tant qu’outil d’analyse.

 Marc Charron 17. Le texte de Culler constitue une réponse à ce que Umberto Eco appelle les « limites de l’interprétation ». 18. En tant que phénomène linguistique et littéraire, l’« ambiguité » est étudiée avant toute chose chez Riffaterre à la lumière de la notion d’ « indécidabilité », propre aux analyses mais aussi à l’écriture de Jacques Derrida. Selon Riffaterre (1980 : 629), cette particularité stylistique s’illustre très souvent par la présence de la syllepse: « […] a pun or, as Derrida prefers to call it, a syllepsis, the trope that consists in understanding the same word in two different ways at the same time, one meaning being literal or primary, the other figurative. The second meaning is not just different from and incompatible with the first: it is tied to the first as its polar opposite or the way the reverse of a coin is bound to its obverse. » 19. Parmi les lectures critiques de ces dernières années qui ont abordé ces caractéristiques, mentionnons ici Michel Moner (1989), Cervantès conteur: écrits et paroles, Madrid, Casa de Velásquez; Alberto Rodriguéz (1995), La conversación en el Quijote: subdiálogo, memoria y asimetría, York (Caroline du Sud), Spanish Literature Publications Company. 20. Beaucoup plus, par exemple, que le lexique s’il faut en croire Schulman (1997 : 23): « La difficulté majeure [que présentait la traduction de Don Quijote] n’était pas tant dans la traduction des termes: les tournures archaïsantes sont le fait d’une syntaxe et d’un rythme plus que d’un lexique particulier.

Sources Cervantes, Miguel de. 1884 [1614 et 1618]. L’histoire de Don Quichotte de la Manche. Première traduction française par C. Oudin et F. de Rosset, avec une préface par É. Gebhart, dessins de J. Worms gravés à l’eau-forte par De Los Rios, 6 volumes. Paris: Librairie des bibliophiles. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1923–1926. L’ingénieux hidalgo Don Quichotte de la Manche. Nouvelle traduction intégrale et annotée par Xavier de Cardaillac et Jean Labarthe, 4 volumes. Toulouse: Privat. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1949 [1934]. L’ingénieux hidalgo Don Quichotte de la Manche. Traduit par César et Oudin et François de Rosset, revue, corrigée et annotée par Jean Cassou; [suivi de] Nouvelles exemplaires, traduction et notes de Jean Cassou, collection Bibliothèque de la Pléiade. Paris: Gallimard. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1961 [1869]. L’ingénieux hidalgo, Don Quichotte de la Manche. Traduit par Louis Viardot avec préface, bibliographie et notes par Maurice Bardon. Paris: Garnier. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1962 [1935]. Don Quichotte de la Manche. Traduit par Francis de Miomandre, préface de Henry de Montherlant, 2 volumes. Paris: Livre de poche. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1997. L’ingénieux hidalgo Don Quichotte de la Manche. Traduit par Aline Schulman, préface de Jean-Claude Chevalier, 2 volumes. Paris: Seuil. Cervantes, Miguel de. 1998. Don Quijote de la Mancha. Francisco Rico (dir), 2 volumes + CDRom. Barcelone: Instituto Cervantes-Critica. Cervantes, Miguel de. 2001. Oeuvres romanesques complètes. Traduit par Jean Canavaggio, Michel Moner, Jean-Marc Pelorson, 2 volumes, collection Bibliothèque de la Pléiade. Paris: Gallimard. Cervantes, Miguel de. 2001. The ingenious hidalgo Don Quixote de la Mancha. Traduit par John Rutherford, introduction par Roberto González Echevarría. New York: Penguin Books.

De la lisibilité des traductions françaises de Don Quijote 

Références Charron, Marc. 2002. “Literally Ambiguous: Issues of Ambiguity and Identity in the Lazarillo de Tormes”. Journal of Contemporary Thought 15: 109–124. Charron, Marc. 2003. “Les limites de l’analyse contextuelle et de la cohérence comme critères de critique des traductions: un cas d’erreur sur la personne dans les traductions françaises du Lazarillo de Tormes”. TTR 16 (1): 11–53. Culler, Jonathan. 1992. “In defence of overinterpretation”. Dans Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Umberto Eco with Richard Rorty, Jonathan Culler and Christine Brooke-Rose, S. Collini (dir), 109–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lefere, Robin. 1994. “La traduction archaïsante: Cervantes d’après Molho”. Meta 39 (1): 241–249. Moner, Michel. 1989. Cervantès conteur: écrits et paroles. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez. Riffaterre, Michel. 1980. “Syllepsis”. Critical Inquiry 6 (4): 626–638. Rodriguez, Alberto. 1995. La conversación en el Quijote: subdiálogo, memoria y asimetría. York (Caroline du Sud): Spanish Literature Publications Company. Rose, Marilyn Gaddis. 1997. Translation and Literary Criticism. Translation as Analysis [Translation Theories Explained Series vol. 6]. Manchester: St Jerome.

Collusion or authenticity Problems in translated dialogues in modern women’s travel writing Maureen Mulligan University of Las Palmas Gran Canaries, Spain

Travel writing is currently the focus of one aspect of Translation Studies that views the process of rewriting of other cultures as a form of translation. This paper considers how some British women travellers in the post-colonial period represent the Other in their texts as voices in dialogues that are purportedly genuine conversations. It discusses both the techniques used to include these conversations in the text, and the rhetorical and ideological effect these have on the reader. We will argue that, because of the special nature of travel writing in the “target culture”, where it plays the role of a privileged text offering an insider view of the “source culture”, the travel writer who attempts to document the speech of members of the source culture is operating as a kind of translator.

Keywords: travel writing, literary translation, conversations, women, rewriting

Is travel writing a form of translation? When a traveller goes to another culture and writes about her experiences there, is she performing a kind of translating act, enabling readers in the target culture to understand and gain access to a source culture that is not easily comprehended? Admittedly she is not translating a given written text, but she is implicitly claiming her right to render the ideas and speech of another, in a language that will be understood easily in her own culture. Through dialogues given as direct or summarised speech, she offers versions, adaptations or verbatim accounts of another’s language in a form which demands to be trusted as factual by the target culture, in the same way that we trust a professional translation. These encounters with the Other are rewritten in a travel text, either in some form of non-standard English (marked to show that one of the speakers was not a native), or in a translation (perhaps with occasional bursts of the local tongue, to add ‘colour’ or to

 Maureen Mulligan

remind the reader of the ‘original’ encounter behind the textual version). Susan Bassnett (1998) has referred to this process as a kind of “collusion” between writer and reader, involving suspension of disbelief, as the traveller/writer apparently converses with ease in alien languages and dialects, or locals speak conveniently in English. All of the different techniques used have the aim of establishing the “authenticity” of the text. Readers are asked to believe in the veracity of the travellers’ tales, but the question of linguistic competence is thus carefully obscured. We collude with the idea that travellers can talk to anyone, anywhere in the world and record their conversations in the form of direct speech (Bassnett 1998: 36).

We will consider examples of this revealing collusion in recent travel writing by Sara Wheeler, Bettina Selby and Dervla Murphy, and consider its ideological purpose in a form of writing that claims to speak for the Other: in effect, to translate cultures. These writers have been chosen because women’s travel writing in the 20th century has generally been discussed less than similar writing by men: writers who have concentrated on women travel writers have tended to focus on the 19th century or earlier, such as Mary Louise Pratt in Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (1992) or Sara Mills in Discourses of Difference: An Analysis of Women’s Travel Writing and Colonialism (1993), while authors dealing with the subject in the 20th century, such as Paul Fussell in Abroad: British Literary Travel Writing Between the Wars (1980), do not refer to women writers in any detail. In terms of these particular women writers, and the books I refer to here, they are fairly typical of the genre in the second half of the 20th century. Sara Wheeler is the author of Terra Incognita: Travels in Antarctica (Vintage, London, 1996), a literary and confessional account of some months spent with a small group of scientists at the South Pole station. In the present article I refer to an essay about a brief trip to Bangladesh, published in 1998 in an anthology edited by Wheeler herself and fellow traveller Dea Birkett, typically entitled Amazonian: The Penguin Book of Women’s New Travel Writing. Birkett herself is the author of the similarly market-oriented Spinsters Abroad: Victorian Lady Explorers (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1989) among others. In the introduction to Amazonian, the co-authors argue “the writer’s inner journey is the most important part – and certainly the most interesting part – of any travel book. It doesn’t make any difference where you go; it’s your interpretation of it that matters” (Birkett and Wheeler 1998: viii). This gives a fair idea of the importance of the role of the interior journey as opposed to the description of another culture in recent travel writing. In Sara Wheeler’s case, this agenda is made clear from the beginning of the article, when she states “I didn’t want to go to Bangladesh at all” (1998: 231). She explains how difficult she has found it to leave the Antarctic project behind, so deliberately chooses the complete opposite: hot, densely populated, putrid: I decided to put it all behind me and, triumphant, bought an air ticket to Dhaka. Fuck the ice. So now it was particularly galling that my heart wouldn’t follow my plans. My fantasy life had always been realized by travel; I had grown to rely on it.

Collusion or authenticity 

This time, it wasn’t happening. The trip to Bangladesh, so thoughtfully conceived, wasn’t turning out to be an expression of my inner life at all (1998: 232).

In the second text by Sara Wheeler that I discuss here, describing a trip to Chile, Travels in a Thin Country: A Journey through Chile (1994), the choice of destination is motivated by similarly personal whims, rather than by any particular interest in the people or culture of the country. She meets a Chilean man at a swimming pool who suggests she write about it, and she likes the shape of Chile on the map: “I was utterly beguiled by the shape of Chile (Jung would have said it was because I wanted to be long and thin myself). I wondered how a country twenty-five times longer than it is wide could possibly function” (Wheeler 1994: 2). Her trip took to Chile took six months; the time spent in Bangladesh is not clear, but seems to be about two weeks. Dervla Murphy, the Irish travel writer, has produced many books over the past forty years including Full Tilt: Dunkirk to Delhi by Bicycle (Flamingo, London, 1995 [1965]), In Ethiopia with a Mule (Flamingo, London, 1994 [1968]), On a Shoestring to Coorg (Flamingo, London, 1995 [1976]) and Where the Indus is Young (Flamingo, London, 1995 [1977]). The text discussed here, Eight Feet in the Andes: Travels with a Mule from Cajamarca to Cuzco, was first published in 1983. Her writing, as can be seen from the titles, tends to involve out-of-the-way places and basic transport. She sometimes travels with her long-suffering daughter, Rachel, and recently has travelled with a more political agenda, visiting Transylvania after the fall of Ceaucescu, or going to Kenya to find out about the effects of AIDS in Africa. Her main enemies on the road are travellers who are less puritanical about their style of travel than she, especially “hippies” and “tourists”. Bettina Selby is of the same generation as Dervla Murphy and is also fond of travelling by bike. Riding the Desert Trail: By Bicycle to the Source of the Nile was published in 1988; it describes a long, slow journey of 4,500 miles across Egypt, Sudan and Uganda. A more recent publication is her Pilgrim’s Road: A Journey to Santiago de Compostela (Abacus, London, 1995 [1994]). Her Source of the Nile book uses a quotation from Amelia B. Edwards’ book A Thousand Miles up the Nile (John Murray, London, 1877) as its foreword; this is another common trait of recent women’s travel writing – the use of earlier texts, especially by Victorian women travellers – as inspiration and reference in more recent travels. Travel writing has an ambiguous status in the literary world nowadays. It raises questions of “authenticity”, “truth” and “faithfulness” which have come to be avoided in the endemic relativism of the post-modern academic forms of debate. When we read serious fiction written since 1945, we are familiar with the techniques the author uses to draw attention to the “fictionality” of the text; when we read history, we are reminded of its contingent and metafictional status as a rewriting of other texts, none of which has ultimate authority: we accept the idea of “historical metafiction” when we read anything set in the past. We read journalism sceptically, especially in time of war, remembering that “the first casualty of war is truth”. Biography and memoir are seen as literary forms, not factual accounts. And in translation, that most complex practice

 Maureen Mulligan

involving not only one literary system and writer but at least two, ideas about what are literal, free or faithful target versions of a source text have led to various schools of thought provoking complex debate among colleagues and academics. Yet when it comes to the genre known as travel writing, these concepts – of truth, authenticity and faithfulness – are still applied without any great anxiety on the part of both writers and critics. Michael Cronin has addressed this issue in Across the Lines: Travel, Language, Translation (2000), where he argues: Indifference to the question of language in many of the key texts on writing and travel that have been published over the last two decades has led to a serious misrepresentation of both the experience of travel and the construction of narrative accounts of these experiences. In particular, the myth of language transparency, the relationship of language and power and the question of the possibility of representation on the basis of universals are highlighted as part of the investigation into the role of language in travel. (Cronin 2000: 2)

The usual pattern of the production of a travel book seems to be that the publisher or traveller thinks of a sexy destination (the East in the spiritual seventies, South America in the turbulent eighties, Russia in the political nineties, for example) or a new gimmick with which to approach the familiar route (travel with donkey, bicycle, microlight, small daughter etc); there follows a short period of hasty preparation, often involving the discovery of a Victorian traveller who did the same journey in ludicrous clothing and whose book provides a route-map; the traveller then heads off to her destination, describes what she sees there, often keeping a diary or journal; meets the locals; has adventures, frequently involving casual sex with a driver or guide; usually goes on some kind of interior journey which is currently seen to be more interesting than the physical one; and returns, a sadder and wiser person, to complete the deal with the publisher and pose for the cover photograph. Evidently the reader is encouraged to view the whole package as authentic – there are photographs, maps, lists of equipment taken, and quotations from local people. It must be real. Of course it is all true. Let us consider that latter technique in travel writing in more detail – the quotations from the locals usually embedded in dialogues with the travel writer. To what extent does this speech function as an act of translation? And how does it contribute to the general impression that travel writing operates as a kind of macro-translation of a foreign culture, in which the travel writer acts as the translator or interpreter – the point of interchange – between two cultures? If we accept for the moment that the travel writer does fulfil this role to some extent, then how far does this involve a moral or professional responsibility to the source text and target text, of the kind that a professional translator has to deal with; or is the travel writer really a writer of fiction? The question of language and communication is rarely seen as a problem by travel writers themselves when they embark on their journey, which suggests either that the writer assumes, as English-speaking tourists do, that everyone really understands English perfectly adequately, if you just speak loudly enough; or that the dialogue is going

Collusion or authenticity 

to be invented anyway. Occasionally a travel writer makes preparations by doing a short language course – in her essay Requiem: Bangladesh (1998) Sara Wheeler prepares for a trip to Bangladesh by enrolling for a term of evening classes in beginner’s Bengali, but when she arrives in Dhaka she finds “none of the rickshaw wallahs spoke a word of English… my attempts at speech met with limited success. I had unconsciously expected Bangladesh to be like India, where English-speakers are ubiquitous; but it wasn’t like that at all” (Wheeler 1998: 233); and later, meeting a doctor on a boat, “This man addressed me throughout the trip in a language tantalizingly close to English […] none of the others spoke a single word of English” (ibid. 244). On another trip, this time to Chile, the same author takes on Spanish: “I persuaded Linguaphone to sponsor the project by donating a Latin American Spanish course and shut myself away with it for three hours a day for the first month” (Wheeler 1994: 3). However, once out in the foreign country, it seems that mastery of the local language is not necessary for the writer to pontificate confidently about complex local matters: after less than a week in Bangladesh, Wheeler (1998) explains that the way tea prices are fixed there “was a typical example of the way the Bangladeshi economy functions. Mahajons, a kind of Mafia, run half the country. The government collects almost no taxes and the state control that does exist is hugely elastic” (p. 238). The text begs the question of where this information has come from, and with what authority Wheeler feels qualified to make these claims. In another example, in Chile, Wheeler gets into a political debate with two local men, Rafo and Pepe, on a beach, and asks about the Chilean intellectuals and the question of exile during Pinochet’s regime. Rafo replies: Each group resents the other: they think we wimped out by leaving, we think we suffered more by being away. That was one of the regime’s most potent poisons, you know – it set us against each other. Not just in a straightforward, left or right way. In more insidious ways, too. When it did that, it weakened our collective spirit. (Wheeler 1994: 79)

This raises the question of language, of who actually said what: a phrase like “whimped out” suggests a highly colloquial standard of English, which is unlikely to be used by a Chilean unless he is practically bilingual; it sounds more like the way Wheeler talks, and yet she presents the exchange “invisibly”, without commenting on his English, which is normally for her a signal that the conversation was in Spanish. At another point, a similar conversation is recorded between her and Pepe, given as direct speech, and Wheeler says that Pepe does not speak English; so we must conclude that these are conversations in remarkably complex Spanish, “translated” into English; another example is the phrase “We could give you a bogus role” (1994: 94) which is incorporated seamlessly into the text as direct speech. Wheeler is an excellent advertisement for the efficacy of Linguaphone, if we remember that she studied Spanish for a month. The whole question of language is confused: sometimes Spanish is given directly, usually in italics, for no apparent reason, and sometimes translated directly: “Are you North American? – No, English. – Es mejor, por lo menos (That’s better, at least)” (1994: 72); and sometimes not:

 Maureen Mulligan

“Capitán Lathrop, Señora, a sus órdenes” – followed immediately by the Captain speaking English. Often Spanish vocabulary items are incorporated into the text for no particular reason, as they are hardly untranslatable terms, except to give that desired sense of authenticity – words like gringo, hacienda, cazuela, soroche, machista, miedo, Señor etc. Cronin describes this effect as “lexical exoticism”, and comments Language is an important source of the detail that confers a plausibility on an account and makes the foreign textually apparent. Words become the souvenirs brought home to the expectant reader […] [T]he words operate as signs of the untranslatable but in a space of translation. The reality that is happening in a foreign language is being conveyed to the reader in the language of the narrative; in other words, it is being continuously translated into that language but foreign words remain as witting or unwitting reminders of how fraught the process of translation is in the first place. (Cronin 2000: 40)

The question of whether the writers discussed here are really as “unwitting” in their rendering of foreign speech as they appear is difficult to decide without a more indepth analysis of their work; however it is clear that the ideological influence of a type of popular feminism on the genre since the 1960s has encouraged the autobiographical, confessional style that avoids a sense of literary complexity in the text. Often writers quote from diaries, notes and letters in their travel writing, with the clear intention of persuading the reader that the text has come straight from personal experience, without any more subtle development of perspective or voice. The effect given, whether deliberately or not, tends towards a lack of self-reflexivity and a desire to appear “authentic”, even naïve. Another popular travel writer, the Irishwoman Dervla Murphy, while using many of the techniques to present language considered above, combines these with other ways of underlining the fact that the dialogues involve speakers of other languages, and one of the least pleasant of these is the tendency to write a version of non-standard English that supposedly represents the way the locals speak. For example in her book Eight Feet in the Andes: Travels with a Mule from Cajamarca to Cuzco (1983), when travelling in the Andes with her nine-year-old daughter Rachel, she meets a Peruvian woman, Katie: “I work in Lima airport as interpreter. You come from New York? Soon it is raining. You stay tonight in my house and tell me about New York” (Murphy 1983: 148). The effect of this speech, presented as a monologue of present tense non sequiturs, is to make Katie seem childish or slightly mad. Another example occurs when the Murphys are being offered local hospitality; this time the speaker is Teresa: “I need much chance to practise English which I study in Lima but now forget” (p. 184). As Murphy’s own Spanish is such that she confuses “Olé” with “Hola” (p. 72), one might think she would be slightly less patronising in her attitude to local versions of English. Another way Murphy deals with the question of language is to use a verb that suggests inadequate language use, without involving her in actually understanding what is being said: “the nuns twittered with excitement” (p. 92), “a group of youths held a mut-

Collusion or authenticity 

tered consultation… and mumbled something about its being ‘very poor’” (p. 80). Alternatively she actively blames the local peasants for not communicating better: “a taciturn young mestizo joined us. He was determined not to communicate…” (p. 114); “five night-shift miners were … inarticulately garrulous” (p. 164); “at first Rodrigo pretended to be welcoming and helpful, in a blatantly insincere way. Then abruptly he demanded our passports and documents” (p. 207); she describes the inhabitants of a run-down farm as: “moronic and/or sullen Indians who either can’t or won’t speak Spanish” (p. 262). Murphy is fond of assessing people’s English in the manner of a Cambridge oral examiner: Ramón has “a smattering of English” (p. 97), some policemen speak “rudimentary English” (p. 149); “the fluency of his English astonished us” (p. 176); “We were appalled to discover that she is employed two days a week to teach English in the local secondary school. Rachel is better qualified to teach Spanish” (p. 191). Again, despite her problems communicating on anything but the most basic level with the locals, Murphy has no qualms about interpreting Peruvian society for her readers and generalising from her experience: The Indians who live within reach of Church influence are usually very pious, and very superstitious, and the whole “saint cult” – especially the Marian cult – is to them of the utmost importance… To the campesinos Christianity is of value only as a comfort. It is not a system of sanctions that raises their moral tone, or a system of philosophy that shapes their intellectual life, or a social service that looks after their educational and medical needs. (p. 252)

As with the case of Wheeler given above, we are forced to ask on what basis Murphy feels she has the authority to interpret the complexities of another culture and make such claims. Also note the use of “campesinos”, when the English “peasants” or “country folk” would be adequate. The inclusion of the word into the English text is a rhetorical device to suggest insider knowledge, adaptation to local life, or to remind the reader that the writer is in a foreign country. Cronin (2000) discusses what he refers to as the “paradox” of the process of translation rendered in travel writing, and of translation in general: Travel writing where language difference is signalled contributes potentially to this heightened sensitivity to the paradoxes at work in translation. In a sense, the writers are using a non-fluent, exoticising strategy where the irreducible otherness of the foreign language and culture is indicated by the obviously translated nature of the text. The otherness is made less obvious indirect speech, where the tendency can be to translate through paraphrase, and any traces of difference are excised from the narrative. (Cronin 2000: 42)

It is important to remember, as Cronin points out, that much the process of translation of other voices in travel texts tends towards a more or less exoticised or alternatively transparent linguistic contact, both these tendencies being strategies chosen by the author for her own reasons, within a longer text that is similarly exoticising or render-

 Maureen Mulligan

ing familiar the more general outlines of a foreign culture through its translation as travel writing. Finally I would like to consider briefly a different approach to the problem of representing language in travel texts, in the work of Bettina Selby. In her book Riding the Desert Trail: By Bicycle to the Source of the Nile (1988) initially we find many of the same problems of communication with local people as in the other works considered here, though Selby is rather more modest about her abilities with Arabic, and makes clear to the reader how communication took place. For example, “Once I had found someone who could understand my few words of Arabic, or as happened more frequently, someone who knew a little English…” (p. 33); “The village elder, who had a little English, asked me about the knife and I explained what had happened, miming where words failed. By the time the incident had been acted out to everyone’s satisfaction, we were all friends…” (p. 41); “Two men came running from the fields to help me. They had no English and apart from the lovely greeting of “Salaam Aleikum” – “I greet you in the name of God” – my knowledge of Arabic had not advanced beyond simple nouns and two word utterances like “Hinna Waybe?” “Where is here?” (p. 87); (In the Sudan): “In every village I had found people who knew English. In theory all children attended school and were taught the subject […] This emphasis on the English language meant that my lack of Arabic was less of a problem than it might have been. In this particular village, young people were home on holiday and able to translate…” (p. 94). She also gives examples of the English spoken – here by Egyptians: “Not Egyptians these women. No Egyptians would do this thing. All Egyptians good. All Africans very good, only from Nigeria and Zaire come big trouble, like these mad women” (p. 22); and “Money is not enough, much money for marry. I am thirty-two, have many sisters and small brothers, not time yet for marry” (p. 73). Again this raises the question of whether this is literally how the person spoke, or whether it is a stylised version of their speech; whether we are expected to believe the author took notes, recorded dialogue, wrote from memory, etc. The question of the subjectivity of the writer/translator applies here, together with the intended function of the text. To a large extent, then, Selby uses familiar techniques to “translate” her experience of contact with another culture through written dialogues. (I use the general sense of “translate” here and throughout, although the exchanges are based in speech and therefore involve a form of interpreting. Even so, the final product is a written text, so translation applies.) However, there is one part of the book where the question of direct verbal contact between two very different cultures becomes more urgent and takes on a new role, that of speaking out to a specific privileged readership in the name of those who otherwise have no voice: in this case, sub-Saharan Africans. Her journey to the source of the Nile by bike takes her to places where few Westerners choose to go, and puts her in contact with people who rarely get the chance to be heard, especially in their own words. She takes the opportunity to become a mouthpiece for the local people: firstly in the refugee camps around Renk in the Sudan, and secondly in Uganda, where the population had suffered appallingly under the dictatorships of Idi Amin and Milton

Collusion or authenticity 

Obote. In the first example she makes contact with an NGO called Concern which takes her to meet people in the Shilluk villages, who describe the atrocities they have experienced during the civil war. It is a long, unstylised, direct version of speech: “We tell you these things”, they said, “because we know you are a journalist and you want to know the truth; if the government knew we tell you these things they would maybe kill us. We put ourselves in danger to tell you these things. When people ask us why we are here we say it is because John Garang [the rebel leader] ate up all our cattle. We say this but it is not true. John Garang did not eat up all our cattle. He took only some. Then the army came and they say we help John Garang and they drive off all our cattle and chase the people out and while the people run, the army shoot at us. Many we leave dead, many small ones, women and men also, many. Then the army slaughtered our cattle. We come here with nothing in our hands; everything we have left behind in our villages. We had everything there; even those who were poor had fish in the streams and mangoes growing wild in the forest. Our people have not known hunger till now. The government cares nothing for us. We are Christians; better for them if we and our children die. The only hope for us is to have our own country. We hope for this.” (Selby 1988: 152)

This is interesting as it is obviously a collective voice, based on various accounts, deliberately anonymous so as not to incriminate anyone. It also takes the travel text into the realm of journalism, rather than fiction. The English used is simple but basically correct and rhetorically powerful; there is no question of laughing at the way people speak. The message is everything. Similarly in Uganda, a woman called Rose gives voice to an account of local conditions that Selby says she heard several times: Three times we were looted. They came with bombs and guns. If you had a child sleeping in a room inside, you would leave him and just flee. You would run with seven children and arrive with just one; the others would be left lying dead by the roadside. The prisons were full. They would come and gouge out people’s eyes, cut out their tongues, crush their testicles between stones like they were castrating a bull. Between Hoima and Kampala they left the skulls lying all along the road so people should know what happened here; some have a rope still around the neck.” (ibid.: 218) Another man, Frederick, continues the account: “Sit down”, they’d say to some and to others, “You go”, and you knew those who were left sitting were finished. There was nothing you could do. I had everything in this house, now I have nothing. When I came back last time there were just three stones on the floor for a fireplace. They have been terrible times; people should know what we went through. (ibid.: 218)

Selby refrains from personal comment and introduces or frames the speech simply (e.g. “Frederick was quieter but more embittered”). What she is doing is making space

 Maureen Mulligan

for a kind of testimonial by proxy, enabling the reader to experience vicariously, as closely as possible, the voices of Africans who rarely get the chance to appear in print. As with most aspects of travel writing in the 20th century, the way in which dialogues with people in the host country is rendered becomes a reflection of the author’s personal agenda and individual style, even though it is presented as a neutral insight into another culture. Of the three writers I have considered here, I would argue that Murphy and Wheeler have little interest in exploring the cultures they visit, Murphy because she is tied to the practicalities of the journey and her relationship with her daughter, and in general is always more moved by her contact with nature than with people; and Wheeler because she has accepted the spiritual quest / interior journey trend in post-feminist travel writing as her only priority (apart from getting published), and shows no desire to get to know local people except in an instrumental way. Selby, who in general in her work makes fewer claims to literary pretensions, avoids the interior- journey route and becomes genuinely involved in the lives of the people she meets, despite the limitations of her language skills. She seems more aware of the privilege she enjoys in her ability to travel with all the luxury of a passport and money, and tries to return the hospitality and show respect for the inhabitants of another culture by doing them justice in her account of their lives. Cronin (2000) refers to this aspect of courtesy and respect in travel writing, especially in the moral obligation on the traveller to make some attempt to learn the language of the host country: The traveller returns the hospitality of welcome with the tentative gift of the language of the host. Furthermore it is a recognition by writers, who of all people profess the sanctity of language, that language is a fundamental constituent part of a people’s culture. To understand a people’s culture would logically seem to demand a knowledge of their language as a first step towards translating the experience of elsewhere into the cultural universe of the mother tongue. (p. 52)

Selby does not learn Arabic beyond a few words, and travels as all English-speakers do in large parts of the world, assuming that she will get by with her own language; her road is a solitary one for much of the journey and she is always moving on; yet she seems to get the balance between an objective, “manners and customs” account and a more subjective “sentimental traveller” about right. She avoids the use of “lexical exoticism” that is sprinkled rather too frequently in the work of Murphy and Wheeler, and avoids patronising local people by criticising their English for being below par, and does not imply that the author has become somehow bilingual overnight. In conclusion, I would suggest that the example of dialogues in travel writing raises questions about translation not of a written text, but of the voices of another culture. It is a kind of parallel activity to translation, often used merely to reinforce the writer’s desire to prove that the journey was authentic and foreign, but occasionally directed more to providing a space for the voices of those whose stories rarely get told in the West, interrupting our armchair travel for a moment while we reflect on who actually said what to whom, and how we come to overhear this distant conversation.

Collusion or authenticity 

References Bassnett, Susan. 1998. “When is a Translation Not a Translation?” in Constructing Cultures: Essays on Literary Translation, S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (eds). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Birkett, Dea and Wheeler, S. (eds).1998. Amazonian: The Penguin Book of Women’s New Travel Writing. Penguin, London. Cronin, Michael. 2000. Across the Lines: Travel, Language, Translation. Cork: Cork University Press. Fussell, Paul. 1980. Abroad: British Literary Travel Writing Between the Wars. Oxford: OUP. Mills, Sara. 1993. Discourses of Difference: An Analysis of Women’s Travel Writing and Colonialism. London: Routledge. Murphy, Dervla. 1983. Eight Feet in the Andes: Travels with a Mule from Cajamarca to Cuzco. London: Flamingo. Pratt, Mary Louise. 1992. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. London: Routledge. Selby, Bettina. 1988. Riding the Desert Trail: By Bicycle to the Source of the Nile. London: Abacus. Wheeler, Sara. 1994. Travels in a Thin Country: A Journey through Chile. New York: Modern Library. Wheeler, Sara. 1998. “Requiem: Bangladesh”. In Amazonian: The Penguin Book of Women’s Travel Writing, D. Birkett and S. Wheeler (eds), 231–248. London: Penguin.

Translators’ agency in 19th-century Finland Outi Paloposki Research Institute for the Languages of Finland, Helsinki1, Finland

Out of many alternative ways of looking at translators’ agency and role I explore the choices, decisions and arguments of one individual translator, K. G. S. Suomalainen (1850–1907). His archives and documents provide ample data on issues such as the selection (or rejection) of books to be translated, translation strategies, the use of source texts and versions, typographical and layout design, and fees. The documents help us study the extent to which a translator is able to negotiate the conditions of his work: the balance between individual agency and collective norms.

Keywords: agency, choice, negotiation, norms

1. Introduction One of the recent directions in Translation Studies has undoubtedly been a shift from texts to translators, from systems to subjects. Historical studies especially seem to invite this kind of focus on the roles of individual translators, as is seen in the thorough review by Dirk Delabastita (2002) on two recent works on the history of translated literature (France 2000 and Classe 2000). The translators’ role has also – understandably – been given much attention in organizations such as F.I.T., the International Translators’ Federation, since its founding. The interest in studying the role of individual translators has resulted in the charting of the history of translation through the work of important (if often invisible) individuals and in collections of translator bio graphies (Delisle and Woodsworth 1995, Delisle 1999, Delisle 2002). There were also a number of national or local projects, for example the translator biographies collected in connection with the TRASNA project in Ireland, which presents a wealth of information on Irish literature in translation.2 A similar focus is evident in other ongoing projects, such as the Portuguese CLCPB project (see Seruya in this volume). There is a two-volume history of translation in Finland under way, to be published in 2007 (Rii

 Outi Paloposki

konen et al. 2007), and one of its explicit aims is to make visible the role of translators in cultural history, linguistic development and literature. Translators’ agency is also the explicit topic of a collection of articles under preparation (Milton, forthcoming). The recent emphasis on agency can be seen as a reaction to a more established tradition of studying norms and systems in translation. As pointed out by Anthony Pym (1998: 161), systems and norms do not just “happen”; it is people who make things happen. However, even if Descriptive Translation Studies (which is, at least partly, the target of Pym’s criticism) overtly focuses on systems and norms, these concepts can be seen as a shorthand for studying the work of actual people. After all, that is where the results of the translators’ work show: translations are the site of linguistic and textual regularities, idiosyncrasies or anomalies, and these in turn are the visible results of the work of acting, decision-making, reflecting translators. Consequently, it is not only norms that can be studied this way. We are dealing here with the interface between collective norms and individual practices and choices. Through the study of norms, we gain insight into the activities of translators. This interface is not a new idea; it was noted by André Lefevere (1992: 9) more than ten years ago: “Translators operate under the constraints listed above. They most definitely do not do so in a mechanistic universe in which they have no choice. Rather, they have the freedom to stay within the perimeters marked by the constraints, or to challenge these constraints by trying to move beyond them”. Translation can thus be studied both as the individual translator’s choice and decision processes and the effects of these in the target culture, and as the norms and constraints that surround translators, which may even have been set up by them or their predecessors. There may also be stages in translation history where there are no translation norms yet and the translators themselves, with their choices, bring about certain states and norms. Such was the situation in Finland in the 19th century: even if translation was looked upon as a way of enriching national literature and developing the written language, and models for this work were taken from other languages, there was no consensus about translation strategies or about the nature of texts to be translated, and no literary or linguistic models to fall back on. We are thus able to study a phase in history where the interaction between individual choices and practices and the response or demand on the part of publishers, readers and critics have given birth to a new configuration of translators’ practices. In this article, I will try to reconcile the two sides of the picture: individual agency on one hand and the surrounding constraints or demands confronted by the translator on the other. To do this, I will analyse a specific historical situation towards the end of the 19th century in Finland and the work of a specific translator, K. G. S. Suomalainen.

Translator’s agency in 19th-century Finland 

2. Subjectivity, individuality, agency? The translators’ individuality and agency can be seen and studied in many different ways: in his/her textual and stylistic presence (deliberate or not) in translations, in book selection or the adoption of certain strategies, and in the impact of the translator on the literary or linguistic scene. The voice and specific style of translators can be analysed on a textual level, with translations as data. Such analysis may take place with the help of electronic corpora (e.g. Baker 2000) or of qualitative linguistic analysis (Pekkanen 2004). Whereas the study of the translator’s voice or style would seem to imply a natural, subconscious use of the language, textual agency can also involve self-reflection and deliberate meditated action (see Merrill 2002). Biographies and personal histories, on the other hand, shed light on questions such as why somebody became a translator, what his/her linguistic background is or was, what kinds of allegiance or loyalty he or she felt towards the source cultures or authors – or towards his or her own language and culture. This kind of background information feeds into a study of why certain works were selected for translation and what strategies were chosen. Moreover, personal details often seem to explain the translator’s influence (or lack of influence), as in Anthony Pym’s suggestion that multiprofessional translators – i.e., translators who also do other work besides translating – may in fact be more influential than translators who work solely on translation (Pym 1998: 163–164). The term agency and the study of translators as agents (of change) often seem to imply an idea of translators as powerful and influential agents. The study of agency may start from an analysis of subjective involvement on the textual level (see, e.g., O’Sullivan 2003, or the literature on feminist translation strategies), and the resulting “manipulation” of the text in the interest of either the source culture (the Other) or of the audience (as in feminist translating). This kind of rewriting is understood to include a deliberate inscribing of oneself in the text, but there is also the literary influence that translators may exert when introducing or experimenting with genres and metrics, for example. In addition to textual agency and its effects on audience expectations, the translator’s role may also extend to the whole of the book market (selection and availability of books) and in this way be formative of audience tastes. John Milton (2003) sees agency as a far-reaching influence which can affect the whole of the national book market (as happened in Brazil due to the activities of Monteiro Lobato), and Lefevere (1992: 35) has shown how translators can decide on behalf of their readers which texts and how to translate: “It happens not infrequently that translators decide … that foreign authors are ‘not always models of taste’”. While the concept of norms stresses the collective constraints affecting translating, the individual combination of experience, talent, creativity and subjectivity should not be forgotten. I will adopt here a more grass-roots level of looking at agency, by studying the everyday choices of an individual translator, K. G. S. Suomalainen. I will explore his suggestions and decisions, and then look at the reactions of his publisher, critics and

 Outi Paloposki

readers. In other words, I am interested in how much say an individual translator had, a hundred years ago, concerning his own work and in the dialogue between him and the other agents in translation. I will then try to contextualise the results of my study to find a balance between subjectivity and norms. My data consist of Suomalainen’s correspondence, his other (personal) papers such as notes and drafts, comments from his publishers, newspaper criticism, and letters from readers. This individual but well-documented source will provide an understanding of what kinds of actions were possible for a translator of his time and what kinds of roles a translator may play.

3. The translator: Karl Gustaf Samuli Suomalainen (1850–1907) The name of K. G. S. Suomalainen (or Samuli S., as he became known), became a guarantee of quality at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, to such an extent that it was used by publishers in book advertising as a sign of a good translation. He was prolific, fast and by all accounts reliable, but what makes him interesting is not only the large scale of different types of work he did and the great number of languages he mastered, but also his very fluent and expressive written Finnish, at a time when most translators and literati were still linguistically affected by the life-long exposure to mostly Swedish texts at school, a background which left many of them somewhat insensitive to interference from Swedish. Suomalainen also happened to be working at a time when the modern translating profession had not yet been born but the elements of change were in the air. The first translators of fiction in Finland had carried out their task on top of (more regular) duties such as those of teacher or priest, and alongside other irregular and “altruistic” tasks such as newspaper editing and writing. The first generation, working from the 1820s to the 1840s, had left a legacy of commitment and toil in the service of creating and developing written language and literature, which were considered signs of a mature nation. They had started their work during a time when literature in the Finnish language included fewer than two hundred books and when there were no Finnish newspapers. The task, then, had been a formidable one. The decades that followed established a steadier flow of translations from more varied sources (authors and languages) alongside a new infrastructure (printing presses, publishing and outlets) and literacy (schools, libraries). Translators now both spent more of their working time translating and produced more translations than their predecessors. Translation was no longer the altruistic work of a few tireless enthusiasts helping to develop the written language and literature. Instead, it was becoming transmission: the task of transferring world literature to the language of a young nation eager to build up cultural capital. On the other hand, translation also attracted people who needed money but did not necessarily possess the linguistic abilities demanded for the job, hence the growing dissatisfaction with the kinds and quality of translated books on offer. Suomalainen epitomizes a period of nascent translatorship: he took up, discussed and negotiated issues

Translator’s agency in 19th-century Finland 

for which there was no stable procedure, routine or codification, such as working languages, strategies, quality and payment. He was one of the first really prolific translators who spent a considerable amount of time in translating, thus preparing the ground for the full-time translating professional of today. Son of a Finnish jeweller settled in St. Petersburg, K. G. S. Suomalainen was born in mid-century, at a stage when a period of relative calm and incipient nationalistic feeling was changing suddenly, with a new censorship edict banning all literature in Finnish (except religious and educational books). Although this event marked the year of his birth, the situation soon became more optimistic both culturally and politically: the gradual loosening and the final ending of the censorship edict led to an increase in the volume of books published in Finnish and the setting up of schools, libraries, publishing houses and bookshops. Suomalainen was the only one of his generation of Finnish translators and writers to have benefited from a schooling in Finnish, as in the Grand Duchy of Finland, Swedish was still the dominant language of education. Despite its location outside the Grand Duchy and in Russia proper, St. Petersburg was the site of a fairly large community of Finns, with one of the first Finnish-language schools in the Empire. His talent was spotted by a teacher, and Suomalainen was sent to the newly established Jyväskylä secondary school, the first Finnish-language lyceum in Finland, and from there he went to the University of Helsinki to study languages and mathematics. Such a combination was not unusual in those days, and his versatile education was of great use to him in later life, as he earned his living teaching mathematics, wrote mathematical exercise books, worked as the editor of the local newspaper, held office on the public library board, and translated over sixty books. Suomalainen earned considerable fame translating Russian literature, for which he was eminently qualified because of his childhood exposure to Russian language and literature. He is considered to have introduced this geographically close but until then almost completely unknown and/or ignored literature to Finns. He started with Pushkin, for which work he was reviewed very favourably in Finnish newspapers, and his translation of Mertvye Dushi (Dead Souls) by Gogol was to become a classic. Suomalainen received the first prize in a competition for translated literature with his Kuolleet sielut, and the translation is still read today (last reprint 1977), despite the emergence of later translations.3 In addition to Pushkin and Gogol, Suomalainen translated Turgenev, Tolstoy and Gorky. He was also among the first to translate directly from French, starting in the 1870s and translating authors such as Jules Verne and Anatole France. English was then a fairly little-studied language in Finland, and most translations from English had been translated through second languages. Suomalainen’s first translations from English were also made with the support of other language versions. From English he translated classics by Oliver Goldsmith, John Bunyan, Daniel Defoe, Jonathan Swift, plus the then well-known H. G. Wells. Danish authors found their way to Finland through Suomalainen’s pen, and he was a soughtafter translator for them.

 Outi Paloposki

In addition to novels, Suomalainen translated non-fiction, especially during the first decades of his translating career.4 After a pause of almost ten years in his translating activity, he started to translate again during the last years of the 19th century and from then on he translated relentlessly, on top of his teacher’s job, sometimes as many as five books per year. He had several projects under way at the same time. During all this time, he suffered from various illnesses, and he was also badly in debt – his house was in danger of being confiscated. His wife Hilma also translated and undertook some of the work commissioned for him. Unfortunately we do not know to what extent they collaborated in their translating. Suomalainen’s home town was Sortavala, now on the Russian side of the border. From his remote homestead he corresponded with his friends, publishers and authors. His own copies of this correspondence are kept at the University Library of Helsinki; an impressive collection of 1500 copy pages of letters by Suomalainen plus dozens of received letters (unfortunately letters from publishers are missing, and as publishing activity was new and largely unregulated at the time, there are no copies in the archives of Suomalainen’s main publisher, Otava, either). The copies are not all in pristine condition, but for the most part they are legible. It is this correspondence which provides most of the available information on the subjectivity of the translator: on his individual decision-making processes and also on the limits of his power.

4. Translator’s agency in Samuli Suomalainen’s correspondence Suomalainen had a considerable role in advising his main publisher on the selection of books for translation. Otava, still today one of the biggest publishing houses in Finland, was set up in 1890 with the aim of improving the quality of Finnish-language books on the market, especially translations. One of the leading principles behind Otava was also the payment of a fair compensation to the translator for his or her work. Suomalainen’s correspondence from his first translation period (1870s and 1880s) is lost and we therefore know nothing of his relations to his first publishers, but a new copybook was started around the time he initiated cooperation with Otava towards the end of the 1890s. The first effort was a failure: Suomalainen was translating a book for Otava when they found out that a translation was already on the market with another publishing house. This resulted in the cancelling of the contract. When this happened again in 1898, Suomalainen was understandably bitter, but he also showed rare generosity in offering to give up his work if the other translator could secure a publisher, since the other one was poorer than he was (!). In the end, however, the other translator gave up and Suomalainen’s translation of Vladimir Galaktionovich Korolenko’s Slepoj muzykant (Sokea soittaja, “The blind musician”) appeared in 1900. By a strange twist of fate, a third translation of the same novel had appeared while Suomalainen’s translation was being printed. This coincidence is a perfect illustration of non-existent copyright practices: no permission was required for translating.5

Translator’s agency in 19th-century Finland 

It is not known whether the first books were suggested by Suomalainen to the publisher or the other way round. He may have started off by offering to translate, not an uncommon way for translators to begin, and he continued offering Otava (and other publishers) books to translate throughout the rest of his life. Out of the 26 novels he translated during 1899–1907, it is possible to identify – on the basis of the correspondence – the initiator of the translation in 12 cases. In six cases, it was Suomalainen, and in the other six cases it was his publisher. He also rejected several books, and Otava in turn rejected some of those suggested by Suomalainen. In addition, Suomalainen was asked to read books sent to him by the publisher and to comment on their suitability for translation. One of the books Suomalainen rejected was Gustav Frenssen’s Jörn Uhl. He set out to translate it without first reading it, obviously trusting the writer because he was a priest. After completing 99 pages (only about one fourth of the book) Suomalainen could not go on. He considered the description of “sexual love” in the novel as erroneous and morally untenable. His literary tastes seem to have been fairly conservative: he preferred “old masters”, although he did translate contemporary literature as well. Suomalainen asked Otava to find another translator and even attached a vocabulary list of repeated words and expressions in his letter, to help the new translator in his task. Otava complied and promptly found another translator, the writer Volter Kilpi, who finished the work. The resulting book is an interesting piece of data for the analysis of translators’ styles and language use as it encompasses the texts of two very different translators, enabling a contrastive study of their language. One of the preliminary findings of such an analysis is that Suomalainen’s language is the more fluent and creative, while the author Kilpi’s language is cumbersome and sometimes difficult to understand, for example in failing to distinguish between he and she (which in Finnish are expressed with one pronoun, hän, only). Without going into a discussion on the relative advantages or disadvantages of fluent language versus foreignization, suffice it to say here that the question of Kilpi’s language use was hardly one of deliberate, reflected-upon decision but of haste and probably even a gut feeling that translating was not a sufficiently challenging task. The main point in the present context, however, is the liberty of the translator to forsake a translation he has promised to undertake without being reprimanded by his – in Lefevere’s terms – patron (the publisher, in this case). Suomalainen used various arguments when recommending books to the publisher. The merits of a potential translation included acclaim, popularity and quality. A book by Herman Bahr had aroused great interest in Berlin; Anatole France and Jules Verne’s works had been awarded prizes by the Academy of France. In addition to or instead of acclaim, popularity or demand for a book also seemed to guarantee success (over 80 editions in the case of France, 69 for Chambers). Suomalainen also gave his own evaluations of the books: “one of the best and most timeless works of world literature” (Fritz Reuter); “literature that does not age” (Dickens). Sometimes he described the content or the style: “a very pleasant psychological novel” (Harraden), “full of the funniest scenes” (Zschokke).

 Outi Paloposki

Turgenev held special symbolic significance for Suomalainen, who commented on the timely message of the author: “Turgenev’s novels are, I think, even more significant for us Finns right now, with the tremendous strain we are under. He, as “an admirer of the West” and with his Western European mind shows us what sort of people we are dealing with”. Russian literature was not universally accepted in Finland around the turn of the century, and Suomalainen persuaded the publisher by referring to the Westerner in Turgenev. Some of the arguments worked, some did not. Suomalainen never got to translate Dickens, and Bahr’s book (suggested to Suomalainen by the author himself) did not go down well either. Instead, the Russian classics he recommended were taken up, and a case of veritable campaigning was that of a book by the British vicar, Arthur Chambers, Our Life After Death, which greatly appealed to Suomalainen’s growing spirituality in his later life and which he finally managed to coax through after approaching two different publishers and appealing several times. He assured the publishers that the book would provide not only spiritual comfort to the readers but also financial success to the publisher. However, there were no new editions, and the reception within the church of Finland was critical. No wonder, as the book was based on the heretical idea of there being no hell. There was, however, some enthusiastic response among the lay members of the church, as can be gleaned from the letters Suomalainen received after his translation was published. Interestingly, the book is a forgotten antecedent for another book a hundred years later that produced havoc in the Church of Finland around the same issue, this time written by a Finnish priest, Antti Kylliäinen. In both cases, the comforting message was drowned in a fury of criticism towards such heretical ideas. Other instances of negotiation in Suomalainen’s career included the use of different source texts, comparison and compilation, especially in adapting, reworking and editing classics. He suggested different source text versions to the publisher, ordered translations in other languages and discussed the difficulties in abridging or adapting works. Adapting, for him, was not a simple task to be carried out by less qualified people or in a shorter time; there were principles to be followed in adaptation and a responsibility to be borne. To this effect, he once heavily criticised a German adaptation for its “blind” domestication. Suomalainen reworked such classics as Gulliver’s Travels, Robinson Crusoe and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, and several of Jules Verne’s books. At a time when the codification of orthography and standardisation of the written language had not yet been completed (to the extent they ever can be), Suomalainen was making his own decisions as to the orthography of loanwords or foreign place names and defending his choices by referring to the need for systematicity. His translations met with growing enthusiasm, carving him a special niche as a model of language use and enabling him to have an influence on the readers’ language as well. To some extent, Suomalainen also advised the publisher on the typography, layout and covers of the books to be printed and on the use of illustrations, which he picked out of different original or translated versions and generally defended with arguments dealing with the nature of the work in question and the quality of the pictures.

Translator’s agency in 19th-century Finland 

Suomalainen was able to negotiate his fees to some extent by referring to the difficulty of the work in question. He was a keen defender of his rights and could be quite acrimonious in his letters if he felt he was being maltreated. This happened for example when it transpired that somebody else was translating a work for which he had been granted sole licence by the author, or when he felt that his timetable or fees were under too much pressure. Then again, when he was badly in need of money, his letters became generally much more apologetic and humble – showing how dependent he was, after all, on the publisher.

5. Credibility of the translator To be able to negotiate, a translator certainly needs a credibility and trust placed in his person. In the case of Suomalainen and his most important publisher Otava, one of the factors contributing to this credibility must have been his long career as translator by the time he started to translate for Otava. He was already well known, he had a reputation for being fast and efficient, and his work was deemed to be of excellent quality. This was proved not only by the favourable newspaper reviews but also by the first prize he had won in the translation competition organized by the Finnish Literature Society in 1882 (with his translation of Gogol’s Dead Souls). His experience in journalism gave him credibility in the technical issues related to layout and printing, and as he was used to editing other people’s texts, his eye for detail and style must have been unusually sharp. The one time he was attacked in an anonymous newspaper article (for an abridged version of Aleksis Kivi’s Seven Brothers, an original Finnish work which was already acquiring fame as a classic by that time), Otava defended him and his adaptation publicly in a long letter to the newspaper. Samuli Suomalainen was thus exceptionally well endowed to become an active agent in choosing and planning his own work. Despite all the toil, however, the one thing he never managed to change during his lifetime was the insufficient fees paid for translating; the meagre increase sometimes granted to him did not suffice to save him from the double work load he was compelled to do in order simply to survive and educate his eight children. In this sense, multiprofessionalism does not guarantee influence on all levels.

6. Agency contextualised As can be seen in Suomalainen’s story, agency is individual – it is at least to some extent dependent on the credibility of the person in question. Agency is also linked with norms. Preliminary norms constrain the translator’s agency in the choice of works to be translated, and operational norms, in turn, may be in conflict with the textual agency of the

 Outi Paloposki

translator. Different “degrees” of norms, as in Toury 1995, can thus be seen to correspond with different degrees of translators’ agency. The balance between the individual translator’s creativity, subjectivity and agency and the norms and constraints of the surrounding society is an issue of negotiation and change, where each individual translator is differently positioned. There is not just one role for the translator during the second half of the 19th century, but several. There were authors who translated. There were people with several other occupations. There were women, who entered the scene of Finnish translation for the first time. There were those who translated for the love of the works they rendered into Finnish, and those who only did it for the money. (Nearly all, seemingly, did need the money badly – yet, for many, it was not the only reason.) Also, the roles were divided among different tasks: to mediate world literature, to mediate ideas, to produce mass literature. In all of these areas a different kind of agency is involved.

Notes 1. This paper was prepared while I was working on a research project financed by the Academy of Finland. During the project, I was based at the Research Institute for the Languages of Finland. The paper was finalized at the University of Helsinki. I thank all the institutions involved and my colleagues there, especially Andrew Chesterman, and the anonymous referees for useful comments. 2. See TRASNABIO, http://www.dcu.ie/~ctts/ 3. In many ways, Suomalainen’s translations challenge the retranslation hypothesis, which claims that later translations are closer to the originals than first translations. Suomalainen produced both first translations which were never superseded by later translations, and second translations which were more domesticated than first translations (by other authors). For the retranslation hypothesis and its empirical testing, see Paloposki and Koskinen 2004. 4. In addition to fiction, Samuli Suomalainen translated a great number of works of non-fiction, mostly of a pedagogical nature. These included schoolbooks of history, chemistry and geometry, but he also translated a learn-to-swim guidebook and a handbook for machinists. 5. Several translators, however, wrote to authors requesting the right to translate their books, and the granted right was then printed in the books to claim authority (“translated by the permission of the author”).

References Baker, Mona. 2000. “Towards a Methodology for Investigating the Style of a Literary Translator”. Target 12 (2): 241–266. Classe, Olive (ed.). 2000. Encyclopedia of Literary Translation into English. 2 vols. London and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn. Delabastita, Dirk. 2002. “From Aesop to Zweig and from Martial to Martial Arts Fiction: Charting the History of Literary Translation into English”. Review Article. Target 14 (1): 149–171.

Translator’s agency in 19th-century Finland 

Delisle, Jean. 1999. Portraits de traducteurs [Sous la direction de Jean Delisle]. Ottawa: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa. Delisle, Jean. 2002. Portraits de traductrices [Sous la direction de Jean Delisle]. Ottawa: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa. Delisle, Jean and Woodsworth, Judith (eds). 1995. Translators through History. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. France, Peter (ed.). 2000. The Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation/History/Culture. A Sourcebook. London & New York: Routledge. Merrill, Christi Ann. 2002. “Playing the Double Agent: An Indian Story in English”. The Translator 8 (2): 367–384. Milton, John. 2003. “The Political Adaptations of Monteiro Lobato”. Cadernos de Tradução XI (1): 211–227. Milton, John (ed.). Forthcoming. Cultural Agents in Translation. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. O’Sullivan, Emer. 2003. “Narratology meets Translation Studies, or, The Voice of the Translator in Children’s Literature”. Meta 48 (1–2): 197–207. Paloposki, Outi and Kaisa Koskinen. 2004. ”A Thousand and One Translations: Revisiting Retranslation”. In Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies, G. Hansen, K. Malmkjær and D. Gile (eds), 27–38. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pekkanen, Hilkka. 2004. “The Duet of the Author and the Translator: Looking at Style through Shifts in Literary Translation”. Paper presented at the 4th International EST Congress, Lisbon, 26–29.9.2004. Pym, Anthony. 1998. Method in Translation History. Manchester: St. Jerome. Riikonen, H. K. et al. (eds). 2007. Suomennoskirjallisuuden historia I–II. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Le concept de mimésis Une clé pour la définition des réécritures d’Antonin Artaud Annick Mannekens Lessius Hogeschool, Anvers, Belgique

Antonin Artaud (1896–1948), a French author many consider to be an innovative genius, has grafted some of his writings onto texts written by other authors. Based on the analysis of one of his texts, in casu the Avertissement which precedes Le Moine de Lewis raconté par Antonin Artaud, we intend to define this activity as rewriting. In order to better understand Artaud’s poetry, we also analyse his texts on Balthus, a painter. Indeed, the way in which Artaud creates from certain texts can be compared to the way in which Balthus proceeds. To reach this definition, we referred to Lacoue-Labarthe’s concept of mimesis such as it appears in Typographies, l’imitation des modernes.

Keywords: appropriation, copy, double, imitation, mimesis, rewriting

1. Introduction Le nom d’Antonin Artaud – poète, homme de théâtre et de cinéma, critique d’art et de littérature, autobiographe – ne peut, aujourd’hui, être considéré séparément du ‘mythe Artaud’. En 1948, l’année de sa mort, il y a un déferlement d’hommages, d’articles et de polémiques. Artaud qui, de son vivant, s’était senti incompris et avait souffert du manque de reconnaissance, est alors porté aux nues, tant par ses admirateurs que par ses détracteurs. Ce génie qui avait sombré dans la folie, alors qu’il voulait repenser le langage, se voit récupéré par différents domaines de la critique littéraire. Cet esprit qu’on qualifierait aujourd’hui d’innovateur s’est néanmoins approprié certains textes d’autres auteurs. Alors qu’Artaud est considéré comme inimitable et absolument singulier, force est de constater que certaines de ses œuvres sont générées à partir de celles d’autres auteurs. Bien qu’il ne s’agisse chez lui que d’une activité, à pre-

 Annick Mannekens

mière vue, périphérique, la question est de savoir ce qu’il attendait de ce détour par des textes exogènes. Cette activité est récurrente dès les premiers écrits et elle parcourt toute son œuvre. En 1925 est publié l’Ombilic des Limbes (1925), recueil dans lequel sont repris Paul les oiseaux ou la Place de l’Amour et Le Jet de Sang, textes écrits à partir d’une des Vies imaginaires de Schwob et à partir de La Boule de verre de Salacrou. Avant 1925, il y a le Palais hanté d’après le poème du même titre de Poe, et L’étonnante aventure du pauvre musicien, à partir d’un texte de Lafcadio Hearn. En 1935, Artaud écrit Les Cenci «d’après Shelley et Stendhal», après avoir «raconté» Le Moine de Lewis (1931) et adapté Le Maître de Ballantrae de Stevenson pour le cinéma (1929). A l’hôpital psychiatrique de Rodez, il ne traduira pas seulement Lewis Carroll, mais aussi des poèmes de Poe et de Southwell (années 1940). Différentes époques, différentes étapes dans la quête d’Artaud. Aussi nous semble-t-il intéressant d’analyser les mécanismes discursifs et les stratégies d’écriture qui se mettent en place dans ce mouvement accapareur et de répondre à la question de savoir pourquoi Artaud utilise des textes exogènes.

2. Artaud comme copiste créatif La première moitié des années 1930 est, pour Artaud, une période productive. Il écrira alors entre autres la plupart des textes où il expose sa conception personnelle du théâtre1. Dans ces textes, sa préoccupation la plus pressante est la recherche d’un nouveau langage scénique rejetant le théâtre mimétique aristotélicien et permettant de montrer la «Vie», avec majuscule (Artaud 1976 : 51), cette vie cachée que le théâtre devait montrer. C’est à cette même époque, en 1931 plus précisément, qu’Artaud, comme il le précise dans le titre, «raconte» Le Moine de Lewis à la demande de la maison d’édition Denoël et Steele pour leur série «Les Chefs-d’œuvre du roman fantastique». Nous n’allons pas entrer dans les détails de la politique éditoriale de la maison, ni nous demander pourquoi quelqu’un comme Artaud a été choisi comme traducteur. Ce qui nous intéresse ici c’est l’«Avertissement» qu’Artaud a fait précéder à son texte, sa traduction, et qui peut être considéré comme le métatexte le plus important d’Artaud sur la traduction2. Nous citons : La présente édition – […] – n’est ni une traduction, ni une adaptation, […] mais une sorte de «copie» en français du texte anglais original. Comme d’un peintre qui copierait le chef-d’œuvre d’un maître ancien, avec toutes les conséquences d’harmonies, de couleurs, d’images surajoutées et personnelles que sa vue lui peut suggérer. (Artaud 1966 : 11)

Artaud est catégorique dans son assertion, ce «n’est ni une traduction, ni une adaptation». De quoi s’agit-il alors, selon lui ? «D’une sorte de «copie» en français du texte anglais original». Les précautions discursives d’Artaud («une sorte de» et l’emploi des guillemets), loin de tirer les choses au clair, ne font que renforcer le flou autour du concept qu’il

Le concept de mimésis 

cherche à définir. Par la formulation même, l’activité copie est, d’une manière ou d’une autre, infirmée, y compris dans la mention qu’il s’agit d’une copie «en français du texte anglais original». S’il y a passage d’une langue à une autre, comment pourrait-il y avoir copie ? Il n’y a donc pas, pour Artaud, identité entre les deux textes3. Quand il tente d’expliciter ses vues sur son activité traductive, Artaud recourt à un autre système sémiotique, à savoir l’activité de peintre : «Comme d’un peintre qui copierait le chef-d’œuvre d’un maître ancien». Cette façon de formuler les choses n’est pas nouvelle dans l’histoire de la traduction. Ce qui est intéressant, c’est qu’ici toute résistance par rapport au mot copier – copie – a disparu, bien qu’Artaud ne voie pas le peintre comme simple imitateur. Il ajoute immédiatement, «avec toutes les conséquences d’harmonies, de couleurs, d’images surajoutées et personnelles [nous soulignons] que sa vue lui peut suggérer». Pour Artaud, donc, le peintre qui copie est créateur tout comme par extension, le réécrivain est créateur. Copier équivaut pour lui à re-présenter dans le sens étymologique du mot (présenter de nouveau). La représentation pour Artaud est ainsi «transitive»4, elle est représentation de quelque chose : présentation à nouveau de cette «autre réalité dangereuse et typique» (Artaud 1978: 46) dont il parlait dans Le Théâtre alchimique. Aussi pourrait-on considérer la conception d’Artaud sur la représentation comme un ut pictura poesis revisité dans le sens qu’il semble souscrire à l’idée que la peinture et le langage devraient présenter la vraie réalité. La juxtaposition des deux systèmes sémiotiques est récurrente dans les écrits d’Artaud. Dans ses écrits sur Balthus, un ami peintre, ses vues sur la problématique de la (re)-présentation de la réalité sont explicitées. La façon dont il crée à partir de certains textes (modèles) peut être rapprochée de la manière dont Balthus, considéré par Artaud lui-même comme un de ses doubles5, procède dans son activité picturale.

3. Écriture ║ peinture : Artaud et Balthus En 1946, deux ans avant sa mort, Artaud écrit son dernier texte sur Balthus. Il en avait écrit un dix ans plus tôt et le premier texte datait de 1934. Ce premier texte avait été écrit à l’occasion de la première exposition de Balthus à Paris dans la galerie Pierre. Dans ces textes, est attestée une position par rapport à l’imitation de modèles (donc aussi de textes) que «l’Avertissement» du Moine avait déjà abordée de façon sibylline. Copier ne signifie pas reproduire mais assimiler un texte, le faire sien jusqu’au point d’ailleurs d’effacer toute référence à l’auteur. Quinze ans plus tard, en 1946, nous retrouvons donc le verbe ‘copier’ au sein d’une énumération, entouré de quatre verbes qui tentent d’approcher tout ce qui n’est pas [nous soulignons]. l’activité créatrice de Balthus : Pourtant la peinture de Balthus vient d’ailleurs, et ce n’est pas qu’elle rappelle quelque chose, ce n’est pas qu’elle refait, copie, imite ou ressuscite quelque chose, non,

 Annick Mannekens

elle a été peinte comme par-dessus le temps par un peintre d’une autre époque, qui s’appelle Balthus […]. (Artaud 1990 : 34)

Contrairement à ce que l’on a pu constater pour l’Avertissement, qui demeure assez énigmatique, aucune ambiguïté cette fois par rapport au verbe copier : Artaud est catégorique. Balthus fait tout autre chose que de refaire, copier ou imiter. Ici donc, Artaud établit une relative synonymie entre copier et imiter. Pour mieux comprendre ce qu’Artaud veut dire non plus par la négative mais de manière positive, il faut remonter deux paragraphes plus haut dans le texte où Artaud écrit que Balthus «pastiche», qu’ « il utilise bien le trompe-l’œil […] » (Artaud 1990 : 33). Quand, ici, le poète emploie le verbe «pasticher» et le substantif «trompe-l’œil», il ne s’agit pas d’une simple imitation, mais bien plutôt d’une imitation trompeuse. Balthus trompe son spectateur. Ceci signifie que pour le poète, la peinture de Balthus est une peinture «anti-réelle» (Artaud 1980a : 242), et c’est cette fausse impression de réalisme qui est pour Artaud le trompe-l’œil. Le figuratif dans la peinture balthusienne est donc illusion d’optique, il ne s’agit pas en effet d’une réalité déjà dévoilée. Quand le spectateur admire, par exemple, La Toilette de Cathy (1933) – la silhouette de la jeune femme rappelant la Venus debout dans un paysage de Lucas Cranach l’Ancien – il peut considérer cette scène comme représentation d’une réalité reconnaissable. Balthus introduit le personnage de Cranach dans une toile qui met en scène une jeune femme, un jeune homme (Balthus lui-même, totalement impassible à la beauté de la jeune femme) et une femme de chambre plus âgée. Il ne s’agit pas d’analyser la scène, ni d’étudier la précision avec laquelle Balthus a repris le modèle de Cranach6. Ce qui nous intéresse ici, c’est le reconnaissable de la scène. Le spectateur inattentif qui croit pouvoir reconnaître la scène peinte par Balthus est induit en erreur. L’idée du trompe-l’œil prend ici toute sa signification. Chez Balthus, selon l’Artaud de 1934, il s’agit de «reprend[re] dans le réel […] son sens secret», «la réalité de l’esprit» (Artaud 1980a: 243). Le texte de 1936 va dans le même sens : selon Artaud, Balthus «reprend le monde à partir des apparences» contrairement à la peinture surréaliste et toute peinture abstraite qu’Artaud rejette, la considérant comme «une peinture de larves» (Artaud 1980b : 201). Balthus «reprend le monde à partir des apparences» mais, continue Artaud : «il [la] réforme [nous soulignons] ; je dirais encore mieux qu’il les refond [nous soulignons, c’est à dire fonder à nouveau] (Artaud 1980b : 201). En un mot et toujours selon Artaud, Balthus part du connu ; il y a dans sa peinture des éléments et des aspects universellement reconnaissables ; mais le reconnaissable (c’est Artaud qui souligne) à son tour a un sens que tout le monde ne peut pas atteindre ni non plus reconnaître. Pour Artaud, la peinture de Balthus, bien que «l’impression qui domine est celle du ‘déjà vu’ » (Artaud 1990 : 33), n’est pas reproduction du réel mais (re)présente le sens secret du réel, c’est-à-dire ce qui normalement ne se voit pas. Balthus passait donc par des modèles dans ses toiles. Selon Artaud, il procède comme il procède pour que les éléments de ses toiles «permet(tent) au personnage [= Balthus] de recouvrer [entrer en possession de] son identité» (Artaud 1980b : 203). En

Le concept de mimésis 

d’autres termes, Balthus utilise ses toiles pour s’approprier sa réalité à lui, pour s’approprier sa propre identité, son moi, qu’il ne possédait pas ou, en tout cas, pas totalement. Tout comme Balthus, Artaud était à la recherche de sa propre identité, et cette recherche l’a mené à essayer de se créer une généalogie à lui. Et pour cela, il devait d’abord passer par ses modèles. La réécriture de textes a donc pour Artaud une dimension existentielle. Par l’assimilation de certains textes, il essaie d’avancer dans cette quête d’un nouveau langage qui lui semble indispensable pour pouvoir traduire7 la réalité de sa pensée par le biais de modèles. Notre choix du verbe passer par n’est pas accidentel. Passer par ne peut pas être compris comme simple étape dans un résultat à atteindre, comme évolution linéaire dans le sens du peintre, de l’écrivain qui imite le maître pour le surpasser. Car Artaud refuse tout rapport temporel linéaire. Dans le passage cité antérieurement, Artaud écrit que Balthus peint «comme par-dessus le temps» et il note aussi «Si Balthus peint comme Poussin c’est qu’il était là quand Poussin établissait ses paysages, et que maintenant il reprend son bien, tout simplement» (Artaud 1990 : 33). Cette idée de remise en cause de toute inscription dans une filiation, idée qui est liée à la question de la généalogie d’une œuvre, Artaud la reprendra l’année suivante dans une lettre à son éditeur dans laquelle il affirmera que le texte de Lewis Carroll (qu’il a traduit en 1943) «[lui] appartient en propre et [que le texte] n’est pas du tout la version française d’un texte anglais» (Artaud 1979 : 147). Il ira jusqu’à accuser Carroll de plagiat. Nous pouvons alors suivre le raisonnement de Jonathan Pollock (2002 : 24), quand il postule qu’Artaud ne faisait que reprendre son bien en copiant le Moine de Lewis. Aussi le choix du modèle ne peut-il être aléatoire. Il faut un modèle digne d’être imité. Artaud voulait être maître de ses modèles pour pouvoir se trouver lui-même, pour pouvoir se faire, pour pouvoir s’approprier.

4. La mimésis comme force créatrice Comment comprendre cette idée de modèle par lequel Artaud devait passer ? Et comment considérer ces textes greffés sur des textes d’autres auteurs ? Y aurait-il lieu de parler de traduction, d’adaptation, de réécriture ? Cette confusion conceptuelle est en partie due à l’écriture d’Artaud. En effet, son œuvre ne peut être classée dans une catégorie standardisée et elle résiste à toute notion, à toute théorisation. La principale raison pour laquelle nos concepts demandent à être affinés est qu’Artaud manie lui-même un discours et théorique et pratique. Le danger de mal saisir son discours devient ainsi bien réel, et le chercheur est bien obligé d’expliciter ses outils. Aussi voudrions-nous avancer le concept de réécriture en le situant préalablement dans le cadre plus vaste de la mimèsis, sans prétendre toutefois que ce concept soit indispensable face à l’œuvre d’Artaud. Il peut sembler incongru d’utiliser le concept de mimésis pour un auteur tel qu’Antonin Artaud pour qui il importait de mettre à l’épreuve le langage en tant que système conventionnel de communication et de représentation. Artaud ne voulait ni repro-

 Annick Mannekens

duire ni refléter le réel au moyen des mots, il voulait au contraire « briser le langage pour toucher la vie » (Artaud 1978 :14). Par ailleurs, la mimésis est un de ces concepts passe-partout qui dans son évolution complexe recoupe toute l’histoire de la représentation dans le monde occidental8. Antoine Compagnon le dit bien : Toute une série de termes pose, sans jamais le résoudre pour de bon, le problème de la relation du texte et de la réalité, ou du texte et du monde : mimèsis bien entendu, le terme aristotélicien traduit par «imitation» ou par «représentation» (le choix de l’une ou de l’autre traduction est en soi une option théorique), «vraisemblable», «fiction», «illusion», ou même «mensonge», et bien sûr «réalisme», «référent» ou «référence», «description». Je ne fais que les énumérer pour suggérer l’étendue des difficultés. Il y a aussi des adages, comme le célèbre ut pictura, poesis d’Horace […] ou cette fameuse «momentanée suspension volontaire de l’incrédulité» qu’on identifie couramment au contrat réaliste liant auteur et lecteur, […]. (Compagnon 1998 : 112–113)

Pourquoi alors s’obstiner à utiliser ce concept ? Surtout que pour Artaud il ne s’agit ni de ‘vraisemblance’, ni de ‘fiction’, ni d’ ‘illusion’ ; il ne s’agit pas de suppléer à la réalité, de faire de la représentation «un atelier de possibles» (Gefen 2002 : 31). Il n’y a pas ici désir de représenter littérairement sa vision du monde, son interprétation de la réalité comme analysée par Auerbach (1991). Artaud cherche à imiter la réalité, mais pas n’importe laquelle, celle qui est cachée pour nos sens, par la re-présentation. Dans ce débat de la représentation qui est «déjà enclos dans le dialogue entamé par Platon et Aristote» (Gefen 2002 : 40), Artaud se positionnerait plutôt du côté de Platon mais en allant plus loin. Pour l’Artaud des années 1920 et 1930 la (re)présentation mimétique n’est pas «un rêve impossible à atteindre» (ibid. : 41) mais l’objet de sa quête. Cette quête se confond chez lui avec la quête d’un nouveau langage capable d’exprimer le plus profond de son moi. La réécriture chez Artaud semble résulter d’une volonté mimétique ayant son origine dans un besoin existentiel. Ceci pourrait faire penser à la mimésis d’appropriation girardienne (Girard 1978 : 14 e.a). Or celle-ci est non seulement orientée vers la possession d’un objet mais aussi vers une affirmation de pouvoir entre deux groupes ou deux individus qui agissent comme doubles dans leur tentative de triompher l’un de l’autre. Le geste d’appropriation chez Artaud n’est pas cependant ce désir d’affirmer son individualité dans une société, par une expansion acquisitive. Son activité mimétique consiste à réécrire les textes d’autres auteurs sans les imiter. Artaud s’approprie son modèle mais ne s’identifie pas à lui. Ici la définition de la mimèsis de Lacoue-Labarthe (1986) peut aider à clarifier cette stratégie d’écriture artaudienne. Selon cet auteur, il y a deux mimésis : une mimésis restreinte qui est reproduction, copie, réduplication et la mimésis générale qui est une mimésis productive. Et pour pouvoir imiter de façon productive, il faut «le don de rien», il faut «être absent de soi» (Lacoue-Labarthe 1986 : 28). Ce don de n’être rien, qui est «don de la nature» fait que l’imitation (la mimésis) devient «force productrice» ou «poïèsis»,

Le concept de mimésis 

c’est-à-dire faire, créer (ibid. : 24). Cette mimésis n’est donc pas reproduction ou copie technique comme apprentissage des modèles, mais production et donc création. Cela fait que le don de la nature, que Lacoue-Labarthe nomme «le don de nature», le don de n’être rien ou «le don de rien» (ibid. : 28), est en fait le don de l’appropriation de tout modèle, de la présentation et non de la re-présentation. Et si nous suivons la logique hyperbolique du paradoxe, nous pouvons dire qu’il n’y a pas de modèles pour l’artiste, que chaque modèle, l’artiste le porte déjà en lui. En effet, l’artiste qui n’est rien, est tout (logique hyperbolique), aussi tous les modèles. Et cette logique du paradoxe est pour Lacoue-Labarthe la structure même de la mimésis. Lacoue-Labarthe pousse cette logique de la mimesis encore plus loin en affirmant que l’artiste doit n’être rien, c’est-à-dire se désapproprier de tout élément (en fait étranger à soi), de tout modèle pour pouvoir s’approprier son moi propre. L’art (donc aussi l’écriture) rend cela possible, l’art est, de fait, ce don. Comme l’artiste doit n’être rien pour être tout, l’auteur doit se défaire de tout modèle pour être tous les modèles, pour pouvoir être son propre corps d’écriture. Toute cette discussion sur désappropriation et appropriation est révélatrice de la compréhension du mouvement accapareur d’Artaud vis-à-vis de certains auteurs. Dans la logique hyperbolique et paradoxale qui définit la mimésis, selon Lacoue-Labarthe, plus j’imite, de cette imitation active, productrice «qui ne se laisse à aucun moment soumettre au modèle qui est le sien, mais qui l’élabore en toute connaissance de cause», «plus je me désapproprie, plus c’est moi-même, de moi-même, que je construis» (ibid. : 102). «La mimèsis authentique est l’intériorisation du modèle, c’est-à-dire une reconstruction : elle est, pour qui n’a pas d’être propre [et Artaud ne cesse de répéter que son être propre lui est dérobé], l’appropriation d’un modèle. La dépropriation la plus extrême est la seule chance de l’appropriation authentique » (ibid. : 102). La «dépropriation» est, selon Lacoue-Labarthe, la différence, l’expérience, «l’épreuve de son altérité et de son étrangeté» nécessaire (conditione sine qua non) pour s’approprier comme tel, «revenir à soi» (ibid. : 79). Imiter est, selon LacoueLabarthe, se désapproprier. En effet, dans les textes qui nous intéressent particulièrement chez Artaud et que nous nommerons donc réécritures, nous osons affirmer qu’il s’agit pour lui de devenir sujet, de (re)trouver son moi, et de le dire à partir de l’écriture, de trouver les mots pour dire son moi, en passant par les textes d’autres auteurs. Dans sa Correspondance avec Jacques Rivière, il explique comment il se sent dépossédé de sa «pensée», «de son être intellectuel» (Artaud 1984 : 24), du langage aussi et que l’écriture est un moyen de lutter contre cela. Artaud se sent donc «absent de soi», pour reprendre la formule de Lacoue-Labarthe, et ses écrits proviennent «d’une absence totale» (Artaud 1984: 24) comme il l’écrit à Jacques Rivière en 1923. Ainsi peut-il, dans le mouvement mimétique comme décrit par Lacoue-Labarthe, s’approprier tout modèle.

 Annick Mannekens

5. Une définition de réécriture En appliquant cette logique hyperbolique lacoue-labarthienne sur la réécriture (chez Artaud), on peut avancer que toute réécriture est déjà écriture et écriture originale. Ceci pourrait présenter une ébauche de réponse à la question de savoir pourquoi un esprit innovateur tel qu’Artaud passe par les textes d’autres auteurs9. Nous avons préféré une approche plutôt philosophique, les définitions existantes n’épuisant pas le cas de figure Artaud. En effet, le concept de réécriture tel qu’il est utilisé en traductologie ou en critique littéraire s’est avéré déficient par rapport aux textes d’Artaud. Pour Lefevere (1992), toute traduction – tout texte – est réécriture réinterprétant des textes, les manipulant afin de les conformer au système littéraire dominant. Dans la réécriture se joueraient des questions de pouvoir et d’autorité entre cultures. Ce n’est pas la préoccupation d’Artaud. Quant à la réécriture considérée comme pratique hypertextuelle, selon la terminologie de Genette (1982 : 13–14), elle est fondée sur une relation chronologique linéaire. J’appelle donc hypertexte tout texte dérivé d’un texte antérieur [nous soulignons] par transformation simple […] ou par transformation indirecte […] (Genette 1982 : 16)

Pour le théoricien de l’intertextualité, la relation entre les deux textes est linéaire : de l’hypotexte à l’hypertexte. Or, Artaud remet en cause toute relation sagittale. Il bouleverse de fond en comble l’idée d’identité (dans les deux sens du mot : identique et identitaire) et l’idée d’originalité et d’origine. Le rapport entre original et traduction est mis sens dessus dessous. L’original n’est pas l’expression unique de l’imagination et de la créativité de l’auteur dont la traduction ne serait que la copie. Artaud tente, bien au contraire, par la réécriture, de créer une œuvre originale. En outre, en réécrivant, Artaud se fait auteur du texte et en tant qu’auteur-traducteur il s’approprie purement et simplement la paternité du texte. Artaud absorbe le texte et le détruit en s’appropriant le statut d’auteur.

6. En guise de conclusion Les formulations de Lacoue-Labarthe semblent s’appliquer à certaines conceptions d’Antonin Artaud, la principale leçon étant qu’Artaud a horreur des inspirations de type mécanique. Les modèles ne s’avèrent féconds que dans la mesure où ils supplantent l’idée d’original. Pour ce qui est des réécritures artaudiennes des années 1920 et 1930, il faut au poète un authentique double et non un original. Rien n’interdit même de supposer que l’idée de ‘modèle’ était de nature à lui déplaire. Il gomme le modèle générateur dans l’acte même où il réécrit. Cet acte d’appropriation lui permet alors de se penser, lui, comme original originel. Une variante sera(it) peut-être que le modèle pour Artaud désigne sans doute une personne plutôt qu’un texte. Artaud, en effet, utilise des textes exogènes comme instruments pour établir une généalogie imaginaire. Dans sa volonté

Le concept de mimésis 

de se créer une origine pure, il prétend s’être (pro)créé lui-même. Ce fantasme d’autoengendrement a des répercussions sur la façon dont l’écrivain fréquente (et réécrit) les textes exogènes et sur son écriture, que nous nommerons provisoirement traductive. Les réécritures sont pour Artaud une écriture à tendance nettement autobiographique. Toute réécriture est donc aussi écriture biographique, écriture de soi, qui remet en cause les notions d’auteur et de traducteur, le traducteur étant aussi auteur. La question de savoir qui est l’auteur, quel est le rôle joué par d’autres intervenants devient problématique. Artaud absorbe ceux qu’il fréquente de très près, les modèles qui le fascinent, les modèles qui lui parlent de lui, au point de devenir lui. Il nous faudra, dès lors, reconsidérer le statut du traducteur et la signature du texte. En outre, Artaud, qui repense toute relation binaire, nous amène également à revoir le rapport entre traduction et original : ce rapport ne peut plus être conçu à partir de notions comme transfert de sens, fidélité, équivalence. A ces deux questions s’ajoute encore celle du rapport à établir entre l’œuvre de l’auteur et la réécriture du traducteur, et, comme toutes les questions soulevées par la lecture des textes d’Artaud, la réponse est complexe. Artaud lui-même, dupe de sa propre lucidité, remet en question l’idée de l’appropriation de modèles. Existe-t-il des modèles, peuvent-ils l’aider?10 En appliquant la mimésis analysée par Lacoue-Labarthe, la réécriture peut être vue dans un premier temps comme une manière de s’approprier ses doubles pour, par la suite, s’en défaire. Tout en se faisant, Artaud prend leur place et se (ré)approprie son être même. Le fait de se défaire de ses doubles en se les appropriant converge avec sa quête d’un nouveau langage. Plus les deux activités se confondent, plus Artaud devient absolu jusqu’à refuser tout modèle. En 1946, il dira dans un texte écrit après son internement à Rodez : «Moi, Antonin Artaud, je suis mon fils, mon père, ma mère, (…)» (Artaud 1989 : 77). Là, l’interprétation Lacoue-Labarthienne de la mimèsis n’est plus applicable. En effet, ce refus de toute hérédité semble aller de pair avec le fait qu’Artaud ne récrit plus de textes. Il semble qu’il veuille se mettre en dehors de tout modèle, qu’il ne croie plus en l’imitation comme “force productrice” (Lacoue-Labarthe 1986 : 24). Cela n’implique pas pour autant qu’Artaud, à partir de Rodez, écarte toute référence littéraire ou élimine toute citation dans ses textes, qui jusque-là sont truffés de références et de citations (qu’il manipule d’ailleurs très librement).

Notes 1. Ces textes seront réunis dans le recueil Le Théâtre et son Double en 1938. Il s’agit là des textes les plus connus d’Artaud et qui ont fait qu’il a été canonisé par des auteurs et critiques dramatiques et par maints metteurs en scène. 2. Dans ce qui suit, nous nous sommes basée sur l’analyse du Moine de Lewis raconté par Antonin Artaud. C’est le premier texte qui a été publié et reçu comme réécriture (voir la critique du Moine écrite par Edmond Jaloux pour La Quinzaine littéraire du 25/07/1931) et comme traduction (voir la critique du Moine écrite par Jean Cocteau pour la N.R.F. de mai 1931).

 Annick Mannekens 3. D’ailleurs, dans d’autres textes de cette époque, Artaud rejette l’idée de copie comme reproduction qui n’a pas de mouvement propre. Ainsi dans Le Théâtre alchimique, il écrit que «le théâtre aussi doit être considéré comme le Double non pas de cette réalité quotidienne et directe dont il s’est peu à peu réduit de n’être que l’inerte copie [n.s.], aussi vaine qu’édulcorée, mais d’une autre réalité dangereuse et typique, […]» (Artaud 1978: 46) 4. Gefen décrit la représentation en crise qui «est en somme devenue intransitive : elle n’a pas d’autre fin ni d’autre objet qu’elle-même». (Gefen 2002 : 34) 5. La notion de double est problématique chez Artaud. Sans entrer dans les détails ici, nous comprenons double comme alter ego, comme copie de soi. 6. Pour cette problématique, nous renvoyons à l’ouvrage de Clair, Jean. 2001. Balthus. Paris : Flammarion et de Clair, Jean et Monnier, Virginie. 1999. Balthus: catalogue raisonné de l’oeuvre complet. Paris : Gallimard 7. Artaud utilise le concept de traduction dans un sens peu commun, à savoir comme manière d’extérioriser sous forme de langage une activité psychique. 8. Il n’entre pas dans notre intention de donner ici un aperçu historique du concept, ni de placer Artaud dans cette histoire de la représentation occidentale. 9. Ceci vaut surtout pour les réécritures de la période d’avant son internement en 1943 à l’hôpital psychiatrique de Rodez, où il se remet à écrire après des années de silence en traduisant des textes dans l’optique d’une Art-thérapie prônée par son médecin traitant. 10. Une lecture de Paul les Oiseaux (1925) montre déjà une remise en question de l’appropriation de modèle. Dans ce texte, il reproche à Paolo Uccello (Paul les Oiseaux) de le vampiriser, lui, Artaud.

References Artaud, Antonin. 1966. Œuvres Complètes tome VI. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1976 +1984. Œuvres Complètes tome I. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1978. Œuvres Complètes tome IV. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1979. Œuvres Complètes tome IX. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1980a. Œuvres Complètes tome II. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1980b. Œuvres Complètes tome VIII. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1989. Œuvres Complètes tome XII. Paris : Gallimard Artaud, Antonin. 1990. Œuvres Complètes tome XXV. Paris : Gallimard Auerbach, Erich. 1991. Mimesis. Amsterdam : Agon. Compagnon, Antoine. 1998. Le Démon de la théorie. Littérature et sens commun. Paris : Editions du Seuil. Genette, Gérard. 1982. Palimpsestes. Paris: Editions du Seuil. Gefen, Alexandre. 2002. La mimèsis. Paris : GF Flammarion. Girard, René. 1978. Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde. Paris : Grasset. Grossman, Evelyn. 2004. “Etre pèresmères (Artaud – Balthus)” in La défiguration, E. Grossman (éd.), 11–51. Paris: Ed. de Minuit. Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe. 1986. Typographies, l’imitation des modernes. Paris: Galilée. Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge. Pollock, Jonathan. 2002. Le Moine (de Lewis) d’Antonin Artaud. Paris : Gallimard.

Name index

A Auerbach, Erich 356 B Baker, Mona 209, 251, 307, 344 Balthus 347, 349, 350, 351, 356 Bassnett, Susan 69, 70, 81, 279, 333 Blum-Kulka, Shoshana 235 Bowker, Lynne 251 C Calvino, Italo 279 Chesterman, Andrew 24, 53, 125, 235, 251, 279 Cicero 21, 24 Culioli, Antoine 308 D Delabastita, Dirk 152, 344 Delisle, Jean 82, 345 Díez Prados, Mercedes 235 E Eco, Umberto 25 Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta 125, 235 F Fairclough, Norman 209, 221 Fowler, Roger 221

G Gentzler, Edwin 82 Granger, Sylvianne 252

M Mezei, Kathy 82 Mossop, Brian 126

H Halverson, Sandra 252 Hatim, Basil 221, 308 Horguelin, Paul 125

P Pergnier, Maurice 308 Pym, Anthony 25, 38, 71, 345

I Ivir, Vladimir 252 J Jääskeläinen, Riitta 54, 126, 235 Jäkel, Olaf 295 Jakobsen, Arnt 38, 54, 235 Jakobson, Roman 25, 38, 308 Johansson, Mats 265 K Krings, Hans 38, 54, 126, 235 Krzeszowski, Tomasz 252 Künzli, Alexander 126 L Lakoff, George 296 Larreta Zulategui, Juan Pablo 296 Lawick, Heike van 296 Lefevere, André 69, 70, 345, 356 Levinson, Stephen 222 Lousada, Isabel 70

S Séguinot, Candace 55, 126, 235 Simon, Sherry 83, 210 Simpson, Paul 222 Sirois, Antoine 83 T Taylor, John 252 Thompson, John 222 Toury, Gideon 26, 39, 71, 182, 252, 296, 345 V Vinay, Jean-Paul 13, 235, 308 W Willems, Dominique 252

Subject index

A abbreviations 183–185, 190–192, 194, 195 accuracy 101, 103, 108, 123, 183, 184, 186–190, 192–196 ACTRES 237, 239, 240, 244–247, 249, 251, 252 agency 86, 87, 95, 335–337, 340, 343, 344 applied TS 250 archaizing translation 311 argumentative texts 216 audience perception 137, 138, 140, 154, 157 avoidance hypothesis 10 avoidance strategy 9 B Bank of English 240, 244 broadband translator 51, 53 C censorship 66, 339 cleft sentences 253 clivagem 253–256, 258–264 cognitive environment 43–45, 49, 51 Cognitive Linguistics 268, 279, 281 cognitive modelling 41 cognitive rhythm 49, 50 comparative analysis 127, 128 comparative Canadian literature 74, 77, 81 Comparative Studies 73, 74, 76, 77, 81– 83 completeness 93, 99, 102, 104, 109, 110 compréhensibilité 311, 315, 318 comprehension 30, 32, 103, 164, 169, 174, 175, 224, 228, 230, 265, 298, 301 computer-aided translation 85

computer-supported cooperative work 85 connectionist principles 41, 42, 45, 46 connectives 225, 226, 229–231 consecutive interpreting 183, 185, 194–197 consistency 80, 88, 92, 103, 105, 107–109, 130, 131, 231, 232, 269 constraints 10, 13, 47, 52, 68, 100, 103, 154, 169, 171, 173, 178, 277, 278, 336, 337, 344 construals 267, 268, 269, 272, 277 content management 88–90 context 3, 5, 34, 43, 54, 62, 63, 67, 68, 74, 78, 86, 88, 91–93, 95, 102, 103, 107, 109, 127–129, 169, 171, 172, 184, 186, 196, 216, 221, 265, 268, 276, 298, 299, 302, 341 contrastive analysis 9–11, 220, 237, 239, 244, 252, 253 cooperation 87, 89, 91–96, 237, 340 cooperative text design 85 copie 348, 349, 352–354, 356 corpus-based research 237 COVALT 282 CREA 240, 241, 244, 249, 250 cross-linguistic labelling 242 culture 5, 22, 24, 26, 32–34, 59, 62, 65–67, 78, 91, 139, 140, 145, 146, 148, 150, 153, 154, 157, 160– 162, 165, 178, 199, 201, 205, 207, 215, 231, 299, 323–326, 329, 330, 332, 336, 337 culture-specific references 153, 154, 157, 160–162, 165

D Danish 80, 127–131, 133, 134, 183, 185, 223, 227, 230–232, 234, 267–279, 339 décalque 315, 316 declarative knowledge 41, 42, 47, 53 discours scientifique 199, 202, 204 DTS 29, 34, 64, 237–239, 244 dubbed programmes 153, 155, 156, 159, 165 dubbese 153, 154, 157, 164, 165 dubbing 138, 139, 148, 153, 155, 157, 159, 160 E economy 174, 175, 178, 194, 195, 327 English 4, 7–9, 11, 13, 15, 20, 21, 24, 48, 50, 54, 61, 74–78, 80, 82, 83, 121, 125, 127–129, 133–135, 137, 139, 140–145, 148, 150, 151, 154–157, 159, 165, 174, 175, 181, 213, 214, 216, 218–222, 224, 227, 238–243, 245–247, 249, 250–252, 264, 265, 268, 269, 279, 308, 323, 324, 326–332, 339, 344, 345 enunciation 298, 306 e-questionnaire 153, 154, 157, 158 equivalence 6–8, 12, 15, 16, 21, 22, 29–31, 34, 140, 252, 278 estruturação informacional 253, 255, 260, 262, 263 evaluations 118, 213, 214, 216, 218–221, 341 expert performance 49, 100, 104, 106, 110 expert SI performance 101 expert translator 42, 47–53, 225 experts 88, 92, 95, 100,–107, 109, 204, 312, 316

 Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies explicitation 13, 43, 125, 223–225, 227, 232, 235, 269, 271 F Finnish 4–7, 9, 11, 12, 86, 213, 214, 216–221, 235, 338–344 focalização 255–257, 260–264 focus 5, 27, 28, 42, 77, 96, 115, 157, 171, 175, 213, 224, 227, 238, 250, 253, 267, 275, 276, 278, 281, 298, 323, 324, 335 FORLIXT 154, 156 French 54, 63, 64, 74–78, 80, 82, 83, 115, 117, 119–122, 126, 141, 181, 214, 218, 220, 297, 301, 302, 304, 305, 307, 311, 339, 347 full words 183–185, 190–192, 194, 195 functionalism 253 G general translator’s competence 41, 43, 45 genre 137, 150, 170, 199–202, 204–210, 314, 324, 326, 328 German 67, 80, 115, 117, 119–121, 127, 128, 133, 134, 141, 157, 159, 175, 181, 219, 253, 264, 342 globalization 76 gramaticalização 256–259, 263, 264 Greek 21, 37, 142, 143, 145, 149, 297, 299, 301–303, 305, 307 H hedging 220 Humour Responses (HR) 137 Humour Studies (HS) 140 I ideational function 216 ideology 66, 199, 213–215, 222 Idiomatizität 282, 284 imitation 347, 349, 350, 352, 353, 355, 356 independent samples 137 indeterminacy 127, 129, 132 individual note-taking preferences 187, 191, 192 inferencing 223–225, 227, 232 information structure 216 intercultural communication 32, 36, 88, 89, 95, 96 intercultural technical communication 85, 88, 89, 91, 95

interference 8, 10, 12, 52, 169, 338 interpersonal function 216, 221 interpretive resemblance 41, 43, 44, 51, 52, 53 intersemiotic transformations 34 Italian 15, 16, 20, 21, 76, 80, 126, 137–145, 148–161, 163–166, 217, 219, 267–279 K Kollokationen 282, 286, 289, 294 Kompensierung 286, 290, 293 Korpus 282, 285, 286 L language activity 297, 298, 300 lecteur 312–319, 352 legal translation 115, 117 lexicalisation patterns 269, 273, 275 linguistics 28, 140, 221, 222, 238, 239, 242, 248, 250, 252, 297–300, 305 lisibilité 311, 312, 314, 316–319 local language 327 local people 326, 330, 332 localisation software 92 M machine translation systems 93 manipulation 92, 119, 214, 215, 221, 337 mapping 49, 64, 250, 282 meanings 129, 132, 215, 216, 224, 241, 242, 252, 297, 306 mediation 15, 22–24, 34, 63, 139, 165 meta-cognition 46, 49–52 meta-cognitive processes 41, 43, 46, 48 Metapher 37, 282, 283, 286–292, 294 methodology 11, 12, 27, 35, 49, 63, 78, 141, 186, 196, 239 mimésis 347, 351–353, 355 modality 214, 220, 238, 240, 243, 273, 274 modernizing translation 311 multimedia translation 155, 159, 169, 172, 173, 178

N narrow-band translator 50 naturalisation 207, 215, 216 negotiation 20, 335, 342, 344 non-verbal humour 142 norms 23, 34, 62, 64, 103, 166, 169, 171, 173–175, 178, 186, 232, 268, 277, 335–338, 343, 344 note efficiency 183, 184, 194 note-taking 183, 184, 186, 187, 190–192, 194, 195 noun phrases 213, 214, 217 nouvelle traduction 313 novice translator 10, 48–51 O objects 18, 19, 45, 67, 241, 271, 275, 277, 305 opera surtitles 169–171, 174, 176 original 4, 6, 17, 18, 20–22, 24, 29, 31, 34, 36, 62, 63, 67, 77, 106, 119, 120, 122–124, 127– 129, 131, 133, 137, 140, 142, 154, 159, 161, 169–173, 194, 225, 245, 248, 250, 251, 260–262, 265, 267, 269, 270, 276–278, 281, 311, 313–315, 317, 319, 324, 342, 343, 348, 349, 354, 355 P performance 42, 43, 48–53, 100, 101, 103–111, 115, 117, 121, 124–126, 170–172, 175, 177, 178, 187, 195, 244 Portuguese 48, 50, 59, 60–68, 80, 157, 159, 253, 335 premodifier 213, 214, 218, 219 prepositions 267, 268, 270, 272 presuppositions 42, 215 procedural knowledge 42, 46 professional translators 54, 93, 115, 117, 124, 126, 142, 224, 226, 230 publishing house 75, 339, 340 Q qualitative and quantitative methods 100, 109, 111 qualitative research 110, 141 quality 4, 12, 27, 28, 30, 35, 36, 85, 88, 91–93, 95, 99, 107, 109, 115–117, 120–122, 124, 125, 138, 139, 150, 159, 165, 173, 174, 183, 184, 195, 225, 249, 338–343 quotations 24, 86, 133, 326

R readability 28, 36, 311 recall 100, 101, 103, 107, 108, 173 reception 60, 62, 63, 65, 66, 77, 127, 128, 156, 169, 171, 174, 177, 178, 342 réception 203 réécriture 351, 352, 354, 355 Relevance Theory 41–44, 46, 48, 49, 53 reliability 95, 99, 107, 108 representativeness 100, 216, 240, 241 retraduction 311, 313, 318 retrospection 102, 103, 108, 111 retrospective protocols 48, 49, 51, 101, 108 rewriting 64, 323, 325, 337, 347 S sample 50, 66, 138, 142, 144–146, 148, 150, 156, 158, 159, 163, 164, 166, 184, 195, 241, 242, 246, 251 sampling 99, 100, 105, 107, 143 screen translation 137, 154, 156, 165 semantic relations 223–226, 231, 232 semiosis 15, 18–23 sense of humour 139, 140, 142, 145, 150 shift 7, 68, 124, 246, 306, 329, 335 SI expertise 99–103, 106, 107, 109 signs 15–18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 170, 300, 328, 338 similarity 5–8, 15, 21–24, 240 simultaneous interpreting 99, 109, 111 Spanish 50, 66, 76, 78, 80, 133, 134, 157, 159, 183, 185, 223, 225, 233, 234, 238–252, 279, 297, 304, 307, 320, 321, 327–329 spatial marker 302

Subject index  Spatial particles 267 specific translator’s competence 43 subjectivity 213, 214, 216, 217, 219, 220, 330, 337, 338, 340, 344 Swedish 6, 80, 127, 128, 133, 224, 227, 235, 265, 338, 339 T target language fit 247, 249 target-text quality 183, 184, 188, 190, 192 teamwork 172 terminology management systems 92 text optimizations 28, 30, 32, 34, 36 Textkorpora 284, 294 textual function 216, 306 think-aloud protocol 36, 54, 55, 115, 116, 117, 121, 123, 230, 235 traduction modernisante 312 transdisciplinarity 31 Transfer Studies 27–30, 32, 33–35 translated dialogue 323 translation agency 86, 87, 92, 94 translation applications 237 translation history 59, 60, 65, 76, 336 translation in the 19th century 64 translation management 35, 85, 86, 88, 92, 94, 95 translation memory systems 92 translation methods 253 translation norms 34, 169, 171, 178, 336 translation phases 229 translation process 35, 41, 48, 49, 54, 55, 88, 91–93, 109, 116, 124, 125, 223, 224, 231, 298, 299, 301, 306

translation revision 115, 116, 117, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125 Translation Studies 11, 15–17, 20–22, 24, 26–29, 34–37, 39, 41, 54, 60, 61, 63–69, 71, 73, 74, 76–78, 80–83, 85, 95, 96, 102, 109, 111, 116, 140, 150, 169, 178, 182, 196, 225, 235, 238, 251, 252, 279, 281, 296–299, 308, 323, 335, 336, 345 translation teaching 95 translation technologies 85–92 Translation Universal 13 Translational Contrastive Linguistics 269 translational data 269 translational impact 137 Translog 38, 48, 49, 54, 223, 225, 228, 235 travel writing 323–326, 328–330, 332 triangulation 48, 49, 99, 100, 102, 104, 109, 111, 223 t-test 137, 144, 146, 147, 148 U understanding 18, 89–91, 95, 102, 109, 126, 134, 157, 160–165, 169, 176, 268, 297, 306, 320, 328, 338 unique item 3–12 V Verbally Expressed Humour (VEH), 137, 138 verb-framed languages 273, 277 vieillissement de la langue 316, 318 vieillissement des traductions 314 virtual translation communities 94 vulgarisation 199, 200, 202, 204, 205, 209

Benjamins Translation Library A complete list of titles in this series can be found on www.benjamins.com 73 Gouadec, Daniel: Translation as a Profession. 2007. xvi, 396 pp. 72 Gambier, Yves, Miriam Shlesinger and Radegundis Stolze (eds.): Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies. Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004. 2007. xi, 361 pp. [EST Subseries 4] 71 St-Pierre, Paul and Prafulla C. Kar (eds.): In Translation – Reflections, Refractions, Transformations. 2007. xvi, 313 pp. 70 Wadensjö, Cecilia, Birgitta Englund Dimitrova and Anna-Lena Nilsson (eds.): The Critical Link 4. Professionalisation of interpreting in the community. Selected papers from the 4th International Conference on Interpreting in Legal, Health and Social Service Settings, Stockholm, Sweden, 20-23 May 2004. 2007. x, 314 pp. 69 Delabastita, Dirk, Lieven D’hulst and Reine Meylaerts (eds.): Functional Approaches to Culture and Translation. Selected papers by José Lambert. 2006. xxviii, 226 pp. 68 Duarte, João Ferreira, Alexandra Assis Rosa and Teresa Seruya (eds.): Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines. 2006. vi, 207 pp. 67 Pym, Anthony, Miriam Shlesinger and Zuzana Jettmarová (eds.): Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting. 2006. viii, 255 pp. 66 Snell-Hornby, Mary: The Turns of Translation Studies. New paradigms or shifting viewpoints? 2006. xi, 205 pp. 65 Doherty, Monika: Structural Propensities. Translating nominal word groups from English into German. 2006. xxii, 196 pp. 64 Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta: Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process. 2005. xx, 295 pp. 63 Janzen, Terry (ed.): Topics in Signed Language Interpreting. Theory and practice. 2005. xii, 362 pp. 62 Pokorn, Nike K.: Challenging the Traditional Axioms. Translation into a non-mother tongue. 2005. xii, 166 pp. [EST Subseries 3] 61 Hung, Eva (ed.): Translation and Cultural Change. Studies in history, norms and image-projection. 2005. xvi, 195 pp. 60 Tennent, Martha (ed.): Training for the New Millennium. Pedagogies for translation and interpreting. 2005. xxvi, 276 pp. 59 Malmkjær, Kirsten (ed.): Translation in Undergraduate Degree Programmes. 2004. vi, 202 pp. 58 Branchadell, Albert and Lovell Margaret West (eds.): Less Translated Languages. 2005. viii, 416 pp. 57 Chernov, Ghelly V.: Inference and Anticipation in Simultaneous Interpreting. A probability-prediction model. Edited with a critical foreword by Robin Setton and Adelina Hild. 2004. xxx, 268 pp. [EST Subseries 2] 56 Orero, Pilar (ed.): Topics in Audiovisual Translation. 2004. xiv, 227 pp. 55 Angelelli, Claudia V.: Revisiting the Interpreter’s Role. A study of conference, court, and medical interpreters in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. 2004. xvi, 127 pp. 54 González Davies, Maria: Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom. Activities, tasks and projects. 2004. x, 262 pp. 53 Diriker, Ebru: De-/Re-Contextualizing Conference Interpreting. Interpreters in the Ivory Tower? 2004. x, 223 pp. 52 Hale, Sandra: The Discourse of Court Interpreting. Discourse practices of the law, the witness and the interpreter. 2004. xviii, 267 pp. 51 Chan, Leo Tak-hung: Twentieth-Century Chinese Translation Theory. Modes, issues and debates. 2004. xvi, 277 pp. 50 Hansen, Gyde, Kirsten Malmkjær and Daniel Gile (eds.): Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies. Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Copenhagen 2001. 2004. xiv, 320 pp. [EST Subseries 1] 49 Pym, Anthony: The Moving Text. Localization, translation, and distribution. 2004. xviii, 223 pp. 48 Mauranen, Anna and Pekka Kujamäki (eds.): Translation Universals. Do they exist? 2004. vi, 224 pp. 47 Sawyer, David B.: Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education. Curriculum and Assessment. 2004. xviii, 312 pp.

46 Brunette, Louise, Georges Bastin, Isabelle Hemlin and Heather Clarke (eds.): The Critical Link 3. Interpreters in the Community. Selected papers from the Third International Conference on Interpreting in Legal, Health and Social Service Settings, Montréal, Quebec, Canada 22–26 May 2001. 2003. xii, 359 pp. 45 Alves, Fabio (ed.): Triangulating Translation. Perspectives in process oriented research. 2003. x, 165 pp. 44 Singerman, Robert: Jewish Translation History. A bibliography of bibliographies and studies. With an introductory essay by Gideon Toury. 2002. xxxvi, 420 pp. 43 Garzone, Giuliana and Maurizio Viezzi (eds.): Interpreting in the 21st Century. Challenges and opportunities. 2002. x, 337 pp. 42 Hung, Eva (ed.): Teaching Translation and Interpreting 4. Building bridges. 2002. xii, 243 pp. 41 Nida, Eugene A.: Contexts in Translating. 2002. x, 127 pp. 40 Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta and Kenneth Hyltenstam (eds.): Language Processing and Simultaneous Interpreting. Interdisciplinary perspectives. 2000. xvi, 164 pp. 39 Chesterman, Andrew, Natividad Gallardo San Salvador and Yves Gambier (eds.): Translation in Context. Selected papers from the EST Congress, Granada 1998. 2000. x, 393 pp. 38 Schäffner, Christina and Beverly Adab (eds.): Developing Translation Competence. 2000. xvi, 244 pp. 37 Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja and Riitta Jääskeläinen (eds.): Tapping and Mapping the Processes of Translation and Interpreting. Outlooks on empirical research. 2000. x, 176 pp. 36 Schmid, Monika S.: Translating the Elusive. Marked word order and subjectivity in English-German translation. 1999. xii, 174 pp. 35 Somers, Harold (ed.): Computers and Translation. A translator's guide. 2003. xvi, 351 pp. 34 Gambier, Yves and Henrik Gottlieb (eds.): (Multi) Media Translation. Concepts, practices, and research. 2001. xx, 300 pp. 33 Gile, Daniel, Helle V. Dam, Friedel Dubslaff, Bodil Martinsen and Anne Schjoldager (eds.): Getting Started in Interpreting Research. Methodological reflections, personal accounts and advice for beginners. 2001. xiv, 255 pp. 32 Beeby, Allison, Doris Ensinger and Marisa Presas (eds.): Investigating Translation. Selected papers from the 4th International Congress on Translation, Barcelona, 1998. 2000. xiv, 296 pp. 31 Roberts, Roda P., Silvana E. Carr, Diana Abraham and Aideen Dufour (eds.): The Critical Link 2: Interpreters in the Community. Selected papers from the Second International Conference on Interpreting in legal, health and social service settings, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 19–23 May 1998. 2000. vii, 316 pp. 30 Dollerup, Cay: Tales and Translation. The Grimm Tales from Pan-Germanic narratives to shared international fairytales. 1999. xiv, 384 pp. 29 Wilss, Wolfram: Translation and Interpreting in the 20th Century. Focus on German. 1999. xiii, 256 pp. 28 Setton, Robin: Simultaneous Interpretation. A cognitive-pragmatic analysis. 1999. xvi, 397 pp. 27 Beylard-Ozeroff, Ann, Jana Králová and Barbara Moser-Mercer (eds.): Translators' Strategies and Creativity. Selected Papers from the 9th International Conference on Translation and Interpreting, Prague, September 1995. In honor of Jiří Levý and Anton Popovič. 1998. xiv, 230 pp. 26 Trosborg, Anna (ed.): Text Typology and Translation. 1997. xvi, 342 pp. 25 Pollard, David E. (ed.): Translation and Creation. Readings of Western Literature in Early Modern China, 1840–1918. 1998. vi, 336 pp. 24 Orero, Pilar and Juan C. Sager (eds.): The Translator's Dialogue. Giovanni Pontiero. 1997. xiv, 252 pp. 23 Gambier, Yves, Daniel Gile and Christopher Taylor (eds.): Conference Interpreting: Current Trends in Research. Proceedings of the International Conference on Interpreting: What do we know and how? 1997. iv, 246 pp. 22 Chesterman, Andrew: Memes of Translation. The spread of ideas in translation theory. 1997. vii, 219 pp. 21 Bush, Peter and Kirsten Malmkjær (eds.): Rimbaud's Rainbow. Literary translation in higher education. 1998. x, 200 pp. 20 Snell-Hornby, Mary, Zuzana Jettmarová and Klaus Kaindl (eds.): Translation as Intercultural Communication. Selected papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995. 1997. x, 354 pp. 19 Carr, Silvana E., Roda P. Roberts, Aideen Dufour and Dini Steyn (eds.): The Critical Link: Interpreters in the Community. Papers from the 1st international conference on interpreting in legal, health and social service settings, Geneva Park, Canada, 1–4 June 1995. 1997. viii, 322 pp.

18 Somers, Harold (ed.): Terminology, LSP and Translation. Studies in language engineering in honour of Juan C. Sager. 1996. xii, 250 pp. 17 Poyatos, Fernando (ed.): Nonverbal Communication and Translation. New perspectives and challenges in literature, interpretation and the media. 1997. xii, 361 pp. 16 Dollerup, Cay and Vibeke Appel (eds.): Teaching Translation and Interpreting 3. New Horizons. Papers from the Third Language International Conference, Elsinore, Denmark, 1995. 1996. viii, 338 pp. 15 Wilss, Wolfram: Knowledge and Skills in Translator Behavior. 1996. xiii, 259 pp. 14 Melby, Alan K. and Terry Warner: The Possibility of Language. A discussion of the nature of language, with implications for human and machine translation. 1995. xxvi, 276 pp. 13 Delisle, Jean and Judith Woodsworth (eds.): Translators through History. 1995. xvi, 346 pp. 12 Bergenholtz, Henning and Sven Tarp (eds.): Manual of Specialised Lexicography. The preparation of specialised dictionaries. 1995. 256 pp. 11 Vinay, Jean-Paul and Jean Darbelnet: Comparative Stylistics of French and English. A methodology for translation. Translated and edited by Juan C. Sager, M.-J. Hamel. 1995. xx, 359 pp. 10 Kussmaul, Paul: Training the Translator. 1995. x, 178 pp. 9 Rey, Alain: Essays on Terminology. Translated by Juan C. Sager. With an introduction by Bruno de Bessé. 1995. xiv, 223 pp. 8 Gile, Daniel: Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. 1995. xvi, 278 pp. 7 Beaugrande, Robert de, Abdullah Shunnaq and Mohamed Helmy Heliel (eds.): Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East. 1994. xii, 256 pp. 6 Edwards, Alicia B.: The Practice of Court Interpreting. 1995. xiii, 192 pp. 5 Dollerup, Cay and Annette Lindegaard (eds.): Teaching Translation and Interpreting 2. Insights, aims and visions. Papers from the Second Language International Conference Elsinore, 1993. 1994. viii, 358 pp. 4 Toury, Gideon: Descriptive Translation Studies – and beyond. 1995. viii, 312 pp. 3 Lambert, Sylvie and Barbara Moser-Mercer (eds.): Bridging the Gap. Empirical research in simultaneous interpretation. 1994. 362 pp. 2 Snell-Hornby, Mary, Franz Pöchhacker and Klaus Kaindl (eds.): Translation Studies: An Interdiscipline. Selected papers from the Translation Studies Congress, Vienna, 1992. 1994. xii, 438 pp. 1 Sager, Juan C.: Language Engineering and Translation. Consequences of automation. 1994. xx, 345 pp.

Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Copenhagen 2001 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Agents of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library (Btl); Est)

Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines (Benjamins Translation Library)

Expertise And Explicitation in the Translation Process (Benjamins Translation Library : Est)

Translation and the Problem of Sway (Benjamins Translation Library, 92)

$In Translation - Reflections, Refractions, Transformations (Benjamins Translation Library)$

In Translation - Reflections, Refractions, Transformations (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Computers and Translation: A Translator's Guide (Benjamins Translation Library)

Contexts in Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Copenhagen 2001 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Agents of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library (Btl); Est)

Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines (Benjamins Translation Library)

Expertise And Explicitation in the Translation Process (Benjamins Translation Library : Est)

Translation and the Problem of Sway (Benjamins Translation Library, 92)

In Translation - Reflections, Refractions, Transformations (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Computers and Translation: A Translator's Guide (Benjamins Translation Library)

Contexts in Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

The Art of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library (BTL))

The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Constructing a Sociology of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Translation as a Profession (Benjamins Translation Library, 73)

Translation and Cultural Change: Studies in History, Norms and Image-projection (Benjamins Translation Library)

Translation Universals: Do They Exist? (Benjamins Translation Library, 48)

Less Translated Languages (Benjamins Translation Library)

Functional Approaches to Culture And Translation: Selected Papers by Jose Lambert (Benjamins Translation Library, V. 69)

Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches to Translation Studies (Benjamins Translation Library)

Jewish Translation History: A Bibliography of Bibliographies and Studies (Benjamins Translation Library, 44)

The Turns of Translation Studies: New paradigms or shifting viewpoints? (Benjamins Translation Library)

Postcolonial Translation Theory (Translation Studies)

Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom: Activities, tasks and projects (Benjamins Translation Library, BTL 54)

Advances in Interpreting Research: Inquiry in action (Benjamins Translation Library)

Contexts, Subtexts and Pretexts: Literary translation in Eastern Europe and Russia (Benjamins Translation Library)

Between Text and Image: Updating Research in Screen Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Training for the New Millenium: Pedagogies for Translation and Interpreting (Benjamins Translation Library)

Ethics and Politics of Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Ethics and Politics of Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies: Selected contributions from the EST Congress, Lisbon 2004 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Claims, Changes and Challenges in Translation Studies: Selected Contributions from the EST Congress, Copenhagen 2001 (Benjamins Translation Library)

Agents of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library (Btl); Est)

Translation Studies at the Interface of Disciplines (Benjamins Translation Library)

Expertise And Explicitation in the Translation Process (Benjamins Translation Library : Est)

Translation and the Problem of Sway (Benjamins Translation Library, 92)

In Translation - Reflections, Refractions, Transformations (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

Computers and Translation: A Translator's Guide (Benjamins Translation Library)

Contexts in Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Multi Media Translation: Concepts, Practices and Research (Benjamins Translation Library)

The Art of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library (BTL))

The Didactics of Audiovisual Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Constructing a Sociology of Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Translation as a Profession (Benjamins Translation Library, 73)

Translation and Cultural Change: Studies in History, Norms and Image-projection (Benjamins Translation Library)

Translation Universals: Do They Exist? (Benjamins Translation Library, 48)

Less Translated Languages (Benjamins Translation Library)

Functional Approaches to Culture And Translation: Selected Papers by Jose Lambert (Benjamins Translation Library, V. 69)

Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches to Translation Studies (Benjamins Translation Library)

Jewish Translation History: A Bibliography of Bibliographies and Studies (Benjamins Translation Library, 44)

The Turns of Translation Studies: New paradigms or shifting viewpoints? (Benjamins Translation Library)

Postcolonial Translation Theory (Translation Studies)

Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom: Activities, tasks and projects (Benjamins Translation Library, BTL 54)

Advances in Interpreting Research: Inquiry in action (Benjamins Translation Library)

Contexts, Subtexts and Pretexts: Literary translation in Eastern Europe and Russia (Benjamins Translation Library)

Between Text and Image: Updating Research in Screen Translation (Benjamins Translation Library)

Training for the New Millenium: Pedagogies for Translation and Interpreting (Benjamins Translation Library)

Ethics and Politics of Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Ethics and Politics of Translating (Benjamins Translation Library)

Recommend Documents