Register-specific collocations.

Register-specific collocations are not simply the set of terms that go with a disci­pline. They extend far beyond the list of terms that one normally finds in specialized dictionaries and glossaries. It is not enough, for instance, to know that data in computer language forms part of compound terms such as data processing and data bank and to become familiar with the dictionary equivalents of such terms in the target language. In order to translate computer literature, a translator must be aware that in English computer texts, data (данные) may be extracted, processed, manipulated but not typically arranged or tackled (использовать). A translator of computer literature must also be familiar with the way in which the equivalent of data is used in his or her corresponding target texts, that is, with the set of collocates which are compatible with the equivalent of data. Being a native speaker of a language does not automatically mean that the trans­lator can assess the acceptability or typicality of register-specific collocations, This is largely why courses in specialized and technical language form an important component of translation training syllabuses.

The concept of dialect.

A dialect is a variety of language which has currency within a specific com­munity or group of speakers. It may be classified on one of the following bases:

§ Geographical (e.g. American as opposed to British English: the difference between lift and elevator; pants and trousers);

§ Temporal (e.g. words and structures used by members of different age groups within a community, or words used at different periods in the history of a language: verily and really);

§ Social (words and structures used by members of different social classes: scent and perfume, napkin and serviette).

 

Вопрос 14.

 

1. The lexical meaning
   
   

Every word (lexical unit) has something that is individual, that makes it different from any other word. And it is just the lexical meaning which is the most outstanding individual property of the word.

The lexical meaning of a word or lexical unit may be thought of as the specific value it has in a particular linguistic system and the ‘personality’ it acquires through usage within that system. It is rarely possible to analyze a word, pattern, or structure into distinct com­ponents of meaning; the way in which language works is much too complex to allow that. Nevertheless, it is sometimes useful to play down the complexities of language temporarily in order both to appreciate them and to be able to handle them better in the long run.

 

1. Collocational meaning

Meaning was discussed almost as if it was a property that each word possesses in its own right. It is, however, disputable whether a word on its own can ‘mean’ anything. To give an account of the meaning of a word in isolation is to contextualize it in its most typical collocations rather than its rarer ones. Asked to explain what dry means, we are likely to think of collocations such as dry clothes, dry river and dry weather, which would prompt the definition ‘free from water’. As we move away from the most common collocations of dry, it becomes clear that the meaning of dry depends largely on its pattern of collocation and is not something that the word possesses in isolation.This suggests that what a word means often depends on its association with certain collocates. When the translation of a word or a stretch of language is criticized as being inaccurate or inappropriate in a given context, the criticism may refer to the translator’s inability to recognize a collocational pattern with a unique meaning different from or exceeding the sum of the meanings of its individual elements. Collocations that involve one or both items being used in other than their discrete dictionary meaning raise similar issues. Taking account of collocational meaning rather than substituting individual words with their dictionary equivalents is therefore crucial at the first stage of translation, that is when the trans­lator is interpreting the source text. even when there appears to be a close match between collocational patterns in two languages, they may not carry the same meaning.

 

Вопрос 15.

1. Notion of register.

Register is a variety of language that a language user considers appropriate to a specific situation. Register variation arises from variations in the following:

Field of discourse: This is an abstract term for ‘what is going on’ that is relevant to the speaker’s choice of linguistic items. Different linguistic choices are made by different speakers depending on what kind of action other than the immediate action of speaking they see themselves as participating in.

Tenor of discourse: An abstract term for the relationships between the people taking part in the discourse. Getting the tenor of discourse right in translation can be quite difficult. It depends on whether one sees a certain level of formality as ‘right’ from the perspective of the source culture or the target culture. What the translator opts for on any given occasion will of course depend on what s/he perceives to be the overall purpose of the translation.. For example, an American teenager may adopt a highly informal tenor with his / her parents by, among other things, using their first names instead of Mum / Mother and Dad / Father. This level of informality would be highly inappropriate in most other cultures. A translator has to choose between changing the tenor to suit the expectations of the target reader and transferring the informal tenor to give a flavour of the type of relationship that teenagers have with their parents in American society. What the translator opts for on any given occasion will of course depend on what s/he perceives to be the overall purpose of the translation.

Mode of discourse: An abstract term for the role that the language is playing (speech, essay, lecture, instructions) and for its medium of transmission (spoken, written). Linguistic choices are in­fluenced by these dimensions. For example, a word such as re- is perfectly appropriate in a business letter but is rarely, if ever, used in spoken English.

1. Strategies for dealing with non-equivalence.

(a) Translation by a more general word (superordinate)

This is one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalence, particularly in the area of prepositional meaning. It works equally well in most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language-specific.

(b) Translation by a more neutral (less expressive) word

(c) Translation by cultural substitution

This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a target-language item, which does not have the same preposi­tional meaning but is likely to have a similar impact on the target reader. The main advantage of using this strategy is that it gives the reader a concept with which s/he can identify, something familiar and appealing.

On an individual level, the translator’s decision to use this strategy will largely depend on:

(a) how much license is given to him/ her by those who commission the translation and

(b) the purpose of the translation.

On a more general level, the decision will also reflect, to some extent, the norms of translation prevailing in a given community. Linguistic communities vary in the extent to which they tolerate strategies that involve significant departure from the prepositional meaning of the text.

(d) Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation

This strategy is particularly common in dealing with culture-specific items, modem concepts, and buzz words. Following the loan word with an explanation is very useful when the word in question is repeated several times in the text. Once explained, the loan word can then be used on its own; the reader can understand it and is not distracted by further lengthy explanations.

(e) Translation by paraphrase using a related word

This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicalized in the target language but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the target language.

(f) Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words

If the concept expressed by the source item is not lexicalized at all in the target language, the paraphrase strategy can still be used in some contexts. Instead of a related word, the paraphrase may be based on modifying a superordinate or simply on unpacking the meaning of the source item, particularly if the item in question is semantically complex.

The main advantage of the paraphrase strategy is that it achieves a high level of precision in specifying propositional meaning. One of its disadvantages is that a paraphrase does not have the status of a lexical item and therefore cannot convey expressive, evoked, or any kind of associative meaning. Expressive and evoked meanings are associated only with stable lexical items which have a history of recurrence in specific contexts. A second disadvantage of using this strategy is that it is cumbersome and awkward to use because it involves filling a one-item slot with an explanation consisting of several items. In certain types of environment, such as subtitling and the translation of advertising and packaging material, there are often severe restrictions on space that preclude the use of any strategy that involves this type of expansion. Similarly, a paraphrase is not normally practicable to use in book or film titles, which need to be sharp and snappy.

(g) Translation by omission

This strategy may sound rather drastic, but in fact it does no harm to omit translating a word or expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not vital enough to the development of the text to justify distracting the reader with lengthy explanations, translators can and often do simply omit translating the word or expression in question.

(h) Translation by illustration

This is a useful option if the word, which lacks an equivalent in the target language, refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly if there are restrictions on space and if the text has to remain short, concise, and to the point.

 

 

Вопрос 16.

1. The concept of word.

The smallest unit which we would expect to possess individual meaning is the word. Defined loosely, the word is ‘the smallest unit of language that can be used by itself’. For our present purposes, we can define the written word with more precision as any sequence of letters with an orthographic space on either side.

Many of us think of the word as the basic meaningful element in a language. This is not strictly accurate. Meaning can be carried by units smaller than the word. More often, however, it is carried by units much more complex than the single word and by various structures and linguistic devices.

If you consider a word such as rebuild, you will note that there are two distinct elements of meaning in it: re- and -build, i.e. ‘to build again’. The same applies to disbelieve which may be paraphrased as ‘not to believe’. Elements of meaning which are represented by several orthographic words in one language, say English, may be represented by one orthographic word in another, and vice versa. This suggests that there is no one-to-one correspondence between orthographic words and elements of meaning within or across languages.

2. Evoked meaning.

Evoked meaning arises from dialect and register variation. A dialect is a variety of language which has currency within a specific com­munity or group of speakers. It may be classified on one of the following bases:

• Geographical (e.g. American as opposed to British English: the difference between lift and elevator; pants and trousers);
• Temporal (e.g. words and structures used by members of different age groups within a community, or words used at different periods in the history of a language: verily and really);
• Social (words and structures used by members of different social classes: scent and perfume, napkin and serviette).