Читайте также:
|
In the field of translation, a translation unit is a segment of a text which the translator treats as a single cognitive unit for the purposes of establishing an equivalence. The translation unit may be a single word, or it may be a phrase, one or more sentences, or even a larger unit.
When a translator segments a text into translation units, the larger these units are, the better chance there is of obtaining an idiomatic translation. This is true not only of human translation, but also in cases where human translators use computer-assisted translation, such as translation memories, and also when translations are performed by machine translation systems.
Being one of the fundamental concepts always argued about in the realm of translation, the unit of translation (UT) has been given various definitions by different theorists. Shuttleworth and Cowie (1997) define it as: "a term used to refer to the linguistic level at which ST is recodified in TL" (p. 192). In other words, it's an element with which the translator decides to work while translating the ST. Barkhudarov (1993) defines a UT as "the smallest unit of SL which has an equivalent in TL". Phonemes, morphemes, words, phrases, sentences and entire texts are probable units of translation for him.
Vinay and Darbelnet consider three following terms as being equivalent: "unit of thought", "lexicological unit" and "unit of translation". What they suggest as a definition for UT is" "the smallest segment of the utterance whose signs are linked in such a way that they should not be translated literally"(as cited in Hatim and Munday, 2004, p. 138). Lexicological units of Vinay and Darbelnet contain "lexical elements grouped together to from a single element of thought" (as cited in Hatim and Munday, 2004, p. 138).
Several types of UT are recognized by them as: functional units, semantic units, dialectic units and prosodic units.
The last three types are, according to them, counted as UT but the functional units are almost too long to include just one UT.
Three other different categories arise while looking at the relationship between units of translation and words inside a text:
1.Simple units: Vinay and Darbelnet correspond this type to a single word. It's the simplest, as they state, and at the same time the most widely used unit. In this case, number of units equals number of words. Replacement of words will not lead to a change in the sentence structure.
2.Diluted units: These units contain several words which in turn shape a lexical unit, since they pursue a single idea.
3.Fractional units: "A fraction of a word" is what this type of UTs are consisted of.
Newmark states, morphemes shouldn't be considered seriously. Clause, group, collocation and words including idioms and compounds are grammatical and lexical sub-units of translation proposed by him. For sure Newmark's proposed category partly relies on a scale formerly established by Michael Halliday in 1985. The following scale is the one according to which Hallidays performs a systematic analysis of English: Morpheme, Word, Group, Clause, Sentence, Newmark considers no priority for each of the lexical or grammatical units, since wherever they exist, he believes, enough importance should be paid toward them.
Briefly speaking, Newmark (1988) labels paragraphs and texts as higher UTs, while sentences, groups, clauses and words as lower UTs. He contends that "the mass of translation uses a text as a unit only when there are apparently insuperable problems at the level of the collocations, clause or sentence level". Recent emphasis on communicative competence and language is what Newmark counts as a factor which had made the text as unit renowned. In his terms, most of the translation is done at the smaller units, i.e. word and clause.
Trying to delve more into the details and providing a clearer elaboration on the concept of UT, Newmark (1988) states that in informative and authoritative texts, the focus is on the word, in informative texts on the collocation and the group and in vocative texts on the sentence and the text, as a unit.
3. Causes of lexical and gramm. transformations
Equivalence, is achieved by different transformations: grammatical, lexical, stylistic. The causes generating these transformations are not always purely grammatical but may be lexical as well, though grammatical causes naturally prevail due to differences in the SL and TL grammatical structures.
Not infrequently, grammatical and lexical causes are so closely interwoven that the required transformations are of a twofold character. The following example illustrates this point.
The vigil of the U.S. Embassy supported last week by many prominent people and still continuing, the marches last Saturday, the resolutions of organizations have done something to show that the Prime Minister does not speak for Britain.
Круглосуточная демонстрация у здания американского посольства, получившая на прошлой неделе поддержку многих видных деятелей, все еще продолжается. Эта демонстрация и состоявшиеся в субботу походы, а также принятые различными организациями резолюции, явно свидетельствуют о том, что премьер-министр отнюдь не говорит от имени всего английского народа.
A number of lexical and grammatical transformations have been effected in: 1) the long English sentence in which the subject is expressed by three homogeneous members (the vigil, the marches, the resolutions) is translated by two separate Russian sentences. The structure of the English sentence is typical of the structure of brief notes or of leads which usually contain miscellaneous information on the principles of “who, what, when, where and how”. This, however, is not usual in Russian newspaper style. The word демонстрация is repeated as both sentences have the same subject. 2) The word “ vigil ” has recently developed a new meaning – “ around the clock demonstration ”. This new meaning is accordingly rendered by two words (круглосуточная демонстрация); similarly, the participle “ supported ” is also rendered by two Russian words (получившая поддержку); 3) a number of additional words have been introduced: у здания (посольства), состоявшиеся (в субботу походы), а также принятые различными (организациями резолюции). 4) The word “ last ” has been omitted as its meaning is implied in the Russian adverbial of time (в субботу); 5) The emphatic meaning of the predicate with its object (have done something to show) is conveyed by the adverb явно. 6) The cliché (speak for Britain) is rendered by a corresponding cliché говорить от имени. 7) Finally, the metonymy (Britain) is translated by the words it stands for весь английский народ.
Strictly speaking only the translation of the complex sentence by meaning of two sentences can be regarded as a purely grammatical transformation, whereas all the other transformations are of a mixed character – both lexical and grammatical.
Дата добавления: 2015-09-11; просмотров: 348 | Поможем написать вашу работу | Нарушение авторских прав |