1. BAZELE TRADUCTOLOGIE ( TRANSLATION SCIENCE) Author: T.Podoliuc, Ph.D. Associate Professor Date: 30.08.2010 Year of Study: III year Total Number of Hours: 90 Number of Contact Hours: 30. LECTURES -20; SEMINARS -10 Number of Individual Hours: 60 Number of Credits: 3 Mode of Assessment: 5 period; oral examination Target Audience: III Year Students with Bachelor Degree

2. Preliminary Competence: All students should have a good knowledge of their native language and the English one. They should be acquainted with English grammar, lexis, civilization, lexicology, phonetics, theory of translation. Mode of Assessment: At the end of the course the knowledge of the subject is assessed at the examination which is taken orally. The tasks included in the examination card can be as it follows: -to answer the theoretical questions( not less than 2); -to translate the terms connected with the subject; -to define the type of the text and explain its principle characteristics. Requirements for examination: The exam is taken orally and is preceded by seminars. All students should answer during the seminars and get marks. According to the answers during the seminars the students get the current marks. Strategy of evaluation: Correct answers during the seminars -20% Correct translation of terminology - 10% Correct answers during the examination – 30%. Defense of Course Paper – 40%

3. The Main Principles of the Theory of Translation Plan: 1.Professional translation as an Act of Communication 2.Different Approaches to Translation. 3.Four Types of Schools of Translation 4. Components of Acts of Communication in Translation 4.1. Aims and intentions 4.2 Content and package 5. Professional loyalty 6. Quality 7. Discourse components 8. The Role of Translator

4. 1. Translation studies have devoted much time to describe translation itself. The study of translation has been dominated by the debate about its status as an art, craft or science. Such scholars as Thomas Savory defined it as an art, and others such as Eugene Jacobson describe it as a craft whereas others such as Nida describe it as science. There is no unity in their points of view but all scholars look upon the word “ translation” from its three meanings: the word translation can refer to: - translation as an abstract concept which deals both with the translating process and the product, containing both the activity and the entity; - translation as the product of the process of translation, i.e. translated text; translating as a process, the activity performed by the translator.

5. 2. At the very beginning translation has been viewed as the rendering of a source text (ST) into a target text (TT), so as to ensure that the surface meaning of the two will be approximately similar and that the structures of the source text will be preserved as closely as possible on the condition they do not affect the target text structures. Translation has been considered as a secondary activity, a ‘mechanical’ rather than a creative process. It is true, that to a great extent, the thinking of the most translation theoreticians has been dominated by Tytler’s normative approach. It sets up a series of rules consisting of ‘dos and don’ts’. His laws are as it follows: the translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work; the style and the manner of writing should be of the same character with the original work; the translation should have all the ease of the original composition.

6. In the 60s (1960) some linguists – Roencveig V. (the USSR) and Nida E. (the USA) proposed a theoretical model of translation based on generative or transformational grammar. It is called transformational model. E.Nida subdivided the process of translation into two stages : analysis and synthesis. During the analysis stage the ambiguous structures are transformed into the structures which are not difficult for comprehension. Such transformations came in handy when the SL structure is ambiguous or when it has no parallel in the TL. The situational model of translation It is based on the situational analysis in linguistics developed by I.Gak(Russia), J.Catford ( UK) and others. It is based on the assumption that language use somewhat different sets of semantic components(elements of meaning) to describe identical extralinguistic situations.

7. Four Types of Schools of Translation Great progress has been made in translation studies since 1965 and clearly defined schools of translation studies have appeared placing their emphasis on different aspects of this very vast field. There are four main general areas of interest with a degree of overlap between them. Two of them are product oriented, the emphasis being laid on the functional aspect of the target text in relation to the Source Language text, and two of them are process-oriented, the emphasis being made on the analysis of what actually takes place during the translation process.

8. Thus, the first category involves the ‘History of Translation’ and investigates the theories of translation and translation criticism at different times, the methodological development of translation and the analysis of the work of individual translators. The second category ‘Translation in the target language culture’ investigates single texts or authors, the influence of the text or author on the absorption of the norms of the translated text into the target language system and on the principles of selection which operate within that system.

9. The third category ‘Translation and Linguistics’ is concerned with the comparative arrangement of linguistic elements of the Source language and the Target language texts regarding the phonemic, morphemic, lexical, syntagmatic and syntactic levels.Therefore it includes the problems of linguistic equivalence, linguistic untranslatability and the translation problems of non-literary texts. The linguistic problems of translation are closely connected with the nature and origin of the language. The investigations of the linguists throughout the history and the analysis of spoken languages date back at least 1600 B.C. in Mesopotamia.

10. Now a number of facts pertaining to all languages can be stated. They are: whenever humans exist, language exist; there are no primitive languages. All languages are equally complex and equally capable of expressing any idea in the universe. The vocabulary of any language can be expended to include new words for new concepts; all languages change through time; the relationship between the sounds and meanings of spoken languages and between the gestures (signs) and meanings of sign languages are for the most part arbitrary; all human language utilize a finite set of discrete sounds that are combined to form meaningful elements of words which themselves form the infinite set of possible sentences;

11. all grammars contain rules for the formation of words and sentences of a similar kind; every spoken language includes discrete sound segments which all can be defined by a finite set of sound properties or features; similar semantic categories (noun, verb, adverb…) can be found in all languages; there are semantic categories such as ‘male ‘or’ female’, ‘animate’,’ human’ in all languages of the world; every language has a way of referring to the past, present, future, negating, forming questions….. speakers of all languages are capable of producing and comprehending of infinite sets of sentences. Syntactic universals reveal that every language has a way of forming different types of sentences; any normal child born everywhere in the world, of any racial, geographic, social or economic heritage is capable of learning any language to which he or she is exposed.The differences we find among the languages cannot be due to biological reasons. The fourth category refers to literary translation theory and practice, it is called ‘Translation and Poetics’.

12. 4. Components of Acts of Communication in Translation It is appropriate at the very beginning to reflect in some detail on the basic components of verbal acts of communication of the type found in professional Translation. 4.1. Aims and intentions Initially, an act of verbal communication occurring in a professional Translation setting is triggered by an aim or intention. These are multi-layered. For instance, at the most superficial layer, an act of communication may aim at informing the Receiver of a fact; at a deeper layer, it may aim at scoring a point in an intellectual debate by providing this information, or at converting the Receiver to a philosophy, or at sending an emotional message. Communication theoreticians often speak of a phatic layer, consisting for instance of chit-chat or small talk to help build a personal relationship; of a cathartic layer, that is, communication aimed at releasing emotions; and of an informational layer.

13. Not all layers are equally active in a speaker's or author's conscious mind and not all are equally powerful in shaping the message which is eventuallyverbalized. Nor are they equally visible to an outside observer, to the Receiver or even to the Sender him- or herself (indeed, some may be hidden in the subconscious or unconscious part of the mind, and would be sincerely disavowed if he or she became aware of them). Generally, conference interpreters and non-literary translators are not called on to work on all levels of intention, though, they have to take into account more than one level in serving the Sender's interests. Basically, they process consecutive units of source- language Text (text or speech) the size of sentences, clauses, or parts of clauses (Translation Units), the content of which is essentially informational.

14. The immediate aims behind informational discourse segments can be classified as follows: Informing: the aim underlying the production of the segment may be limited to providing a piece of information such as an address, a name, dimensions of an object, etc. Explaining: the aim of the segment may be to clarify or to explain through information, as is the case of the explanation of symbols and abbrevia­tions in a scientific paper. Persuading: a text segment may introduce a piece of information in order to convince the reader or listener that the Sender's idea is correct, morally right, appropriate for the circumstances, etc. For instance, figures may be given as evidence, or an authoritative personality supporting an opinion may be quoted.

15. In informational discourse such as is generally processed in non-literary inter­pretation and translation, these three components may also be equally active in the Sender's mind: a piece of information may be consciously chosen for the purpose of explaining an idea, and the explanation may be given so as to convince the Receiver. The Translator who aims at serving the Sender will strive to produce his or her own target-language discourse in such a way as to contribute to all these "aim-layers." Since they converge toward the same goal, this does not pose any problem of principle; the main obstacles arise from the possible inadequacy or relative weakness of the information or package of the Text in relation to the Sender's aims and the Receiver's attitude.

16. 4.2 Content and package In most verbal communication acts, in order to achieve an aim, the Sender issues a verbal signal, written or spoken, which consists of informational content (the Message) and its package. In speeches, the package is made up of the words and linguistic structures of the speech, as well as the voice and delivery (and sometimes, especially in poetry, the actual combination of word sounds and rhythm), plus a non-verbal signal; in written texts, it is composed of words, linguistic structures, fonts, page layout, graphics, etc. It is important to note that both content and package are selected as a function of the characteristics of the target Receivers as perceived by the Sender, in particular their knowledge of the language, subject, and context, and their personal and cultural attitudes toward the Sender and his or her ideas. Basically, from the Sender's viewpoint, communication is successful if he or she manages to achieve the aim: that is, in the case of non-literary interpretation and translation, if Receivers of the target-language text are successfully informed, understand the point, and/or have been persuaded.

17. 5. Professional loyalty Professional translation does not take place in a vacuum; it exists only as a service to be provided to other people. When such people communicate, they have aims. This raises a problem of principle: the Translator is working for the Sender, but also for the Receiver and the Client, whose purposes and intentions, may not tally. This is particularly true as regards the persuading aim, when the Receiver, whose interest may be different from the Sender's, may not want to be convinced and it also may apply to the informing aim, when Receivers may be interested only in the part of the information the Sender has chosen to give them, or may assign different weights to information elements. This is seen very clearly in legal proceedings, for example, where lawyers try to make the most of some pieces of information and to devalue others.

18. In interpretation, a listener or chairperson in a negotiation may want the interpreter to summarize or skip some speech segments because they do not want to hear them, although the speaker clearly intends them to be part of the message. In such cases, the Translator is caught between conflicting interests and pressures. The question of professional loyalty is therefore a very real one. It is an ethical or philosophical issue rather than a technical one, but it does have practical implications. The basic and probably most widely accepted position is that the Translator is an alter ego of the author or speaker, essentially because such conflicts of interest are rather rare in translation and conference interpretation, though they may be frequent in legal translation and in court and community interpreting. This implies that ethically, the Translator should consider as his or her own the intentions or aims of the author or speaker and act accordingly, even against the interests of the reader or listener.

19. The Translator's position is often defined as a neutral one. To serve the author or speaker, the Translator should be biased in their favor (but not to the point of being blind to the possible reactions of the Receiver, as this may lead to a lesser capacity to serve the former). If, in a conference, the interpreter works alternately for opposing speakers, his or her loyalty shifts from one to the other as he or she interprets them. In translation, Sender’s loyalty generally poses few practical problems; in interpretation, however, feedback can come in during interpretation and interfere (questions, hostile reactions, interruptions from listeners). A corollary of the Sender-loyalty principle is that the interests of the Client, who is not intrinsically part of the Sender-to-Receiver communication process, must not be taken into account if they are not compatible with the Sender's aims. The Sender-loyalty principle is not the only loyalty principle to be found in professional Translation. Some Translators see themselves as working for the Receiver irrespective of the interests of the Sender. Others feel their loyalty is due to the Client rather than to either the Sender or the Receiver. This in particular is the viewpoint of army and government Translators, in whose case such loyalty is considered essential.

20. . Quality Considering that the Sender formulates a statement with an aim in mind, it is to assume that from his or her point of view, at the level of each Text segment, communication is successful if the aim is achieved or at least reasonably well served by the segment. From the Receivers' point of view, Communication is successful if they understand the Sender's message, regardless of the fulfillment of the Sender's aims: they may be satisfied with the communication even if they challenge the explanation and even if they fail to be convinced by the message. Generally, as explained above, Translators regard themselves as serving primarily the Sender, the Receiver, or the Client. They can therefore consider their task to have been successfully performed if they provide a satisfactory communication service according to the criteria of the Sender, the Receiver, or the Client respectively, depending on their basic philosophy in this respect.

21. It should be stressed that the Translator is instrumental in helping to achieve the Sender's aims, but cannot guarantee their fulfillment: the Sender's statement may be inadequate, and the Receivers may lack the necessary background knowledge, intellectual aptitude, or motivation to receive the message. In fact, they may have a strong resistance to the ideas the Sender is trying to transmit. Translators are also hampered by their position as "outsiders" who know less—generally much less in most technical and scientific translation settings— about the subject at hand. Furthermore, on the communication configuration side, the Translator may know very little about the Sender and the Receiver, especially when working for a Client who is neither, such as a translation company. It follows that the degree of success in the communication act cannot be taken as the sole criterion of translation quality, though decisions made by the Translator have to be compatible with the aims of the communication actor the translation is serving, generally the Sender.

22. 7. Discourse components As indicated above, the act of communication occurring in the translation setting can be analyzed as a set of two parallel components, namely content and package, which interact to provide the desired effect. For instance, good content is weakened by poor style in writing and by a poor voice or poor delivery in a speech. Conversely, a good voice and pleasant delivery may occasionally do more toward convincing a listener than the quality of the idea that is formulated or the information that is delivered.

23. In fact, packaging may result in a distorted view of quality, especially in interpreting. One often hears delegates assess an interpreter's performance as‘good’ in spite of the fact that the interpreter sitting adjacent in the booth could detect numerous and sometimes major errors of content. It appears that the interpreter’s voice and self-assured delivery have a confidence-inspiring effect. Conversely, beginning interpreters with a somewhat hesitant voice are often mistrusted by delegates, however faithful and clear the informational content of their speech. Basically, however, there is a consensus on some quality criteria which are more or less independent of the context: ideational clarity, linguistic acceptability, and terminological accuracy as well as fidelity on one side, and appropriate professional behavior on the other, all contribute to high- quality translation.

24. It is also worthwhile noting that some authors believe that acceptabil­ity criteria are not the same for translated texts as for texts written directly in the target language. In literary translation, this is easy to understand: literary texts are essentially vehicles for much more than information, including emo­tional and aesthetic components and readers may be aware of and wish to retain in the target text linguistic traces of some features of the source language and culture and of the author's literary personality. However, in the translation of primarily informational texts, translation instructors seem to hold the unani­mous view that the sole applicable criteria of acceptability are those of the target language.

25. The Sender In translation, Senders are generally unaware of the translation setting, and frequently do not even know the text is being translated. Most often, their command of the target language is weak or even nonexistent. When they do see the translation and when their understanding of the target language is adequate, they may be in a good position to assess translation quality insofar as they understand the content of the text and can pick up inaccuracies. In interpretation, Senders are generally aware of the fact that they are being interpreted and interact with the Receiver. In the consecutive mode, they can listen to the target-language speech, and, given sufficient understanding of the target language, be in a good position to assess the quality of interpretation. In the simultaneous mode, Senders cannot hear the target- language speech, and can therefore only check it to a very limited extent through the reaction of the Receivers (the delegates), if any.

26. The Receiver of the target-language text Receivers are at the opposite end of the communication line. In translation, they generally see only the target-language text and could not understand the source-language text even if they saw it—otherwise, they would not need the translation. As far as the packaging is concerned, they can judge the clarity, linguistic acceptability, terminological accuracy, and logical consistency of the translation. However, they have no way of checking directly the fidelity of the target-language text, though they may be able to identify inaccuracies if the translator's output contains inconsistencies or gross errors which they believe are not likely to have originated in the Sender's discourse.

27. In simultaneous interpretation, the situation is similar insofar as delegates can listen only to the original, or else to the interpretation. Moreover, while a reader can often obtain the source-language text for verification purposes, doing the same thing for a speech is very difficult. A delegate listening to simultaneous interpretation can therefore assess the packaging, but may find it just as difficult to assess content fidelity as the Reader of a written translation. In consecutive interpretation, the situation is quite different: if delegates' understanding of both languages is good enough, they are in a relatively good position to assess the quality of interpretation regarding the accuracy of individual segments, though they may not be able to note all the omissions because of the large quantity of information involved and the fact that they do not take notes as the interpreter does.

28. The Client When the Client is neither the Sender nor the Receiver, chances are that he or she does not read the translation or listen to the interpretation and does not know much about the subject. He or she is therefore not in a good position to assess the quality of the translation, and relies mostly on feedback from the Receivers or from other Translators. In some cases, however, the Client does have translation competence and does check translation quality as a service to the other actors. In such a case, he or she can be a very good quality assessor.

29. The Translator The Translator as a Receiver and a Sender, has a good understanding of the language and a good command of the target language, but generally knows less about the subject, the motivations, the aims, and the respective interests of the actors, and is less familiar with the appropriate terminology than the Sender and the Receiver. Another constraint applies specifically to interpreters: because they are engrossed in complex cognitive operations under severe time pressure, their processing capacity is busy if not overloaded, and they are not in a position to monitor fully the quality of their output while interpreting. In contrast, Translators have the material at hand and can scrutinize it in both the source language and the target language at any time. To sum up, the Translator is in a better position to assess quality than either the Sender or the Receiver in some respects.

30. The Role of a Translator Some scholars say that inside or between languages human communication equals translation that is ‘all communicators are translators’. This is possible because as receivers (whether listeners or readers) they face essentially the same problem: they receive signal containing messages encoded in a communication system which is not identical with their own. But a question may arise regarding the difference between the translator or interpreter and the normal communicator. It is the re-coding process which makes the translator differ from the normal communicator. This is rooted in the definition given to the translator as a bilingual mediating agent between monolingual communication participants in two different language communities. It means that the translator decodes messages transmitted in one language and encodes them in another.

31. Sometimes scholars speak about two types of bilingualism – ‘pure’ and ‘mixed’. Later on these two types were referred to as ‘coordinated’ and ‘subordinated’. The first type means that the knowledge of systems of both languages is formed independently, they do not interfere. The person knows both languages perfectly well, he has no difficulty in finding equivalents. This is a way when a person uses both languages since his childhood. The ‘mixed’ type means that the person began to study the foreign language being a grown-up when he possessed the system of native language and this system always interferes with the system of a foreign language. Paul Newmark says: ‘ … Any fool can learn a language… but it takes an intelligent person to become a translator’.

32. Firstly, a translator is an applied linguist who has certain obligations to the understanding of language and an ability to explain the acts of communication in which we are engaged; Secondly, as a translation is one of the mostly powerful means of negotiation between the communication partners, the translator has a meta-communicational status, being a sort of a third party to the initial communication on the one hand, and having to establish a hypothetical situation of communication in the language culture on the other. He is a mediator between intercultural situations of communication. This is based on his personal perception of the cultural equation and on the cultural competence. He mediates between two situations, he defines norms and options that need to be established between two language cultures.

33. One of the translator’s major problems is to analyse the surface structure of the Source text with its explicit clause structures coming to the implicit. It is obvious that the professional translator needs: syntactic knowledge, that is how clauses are used to carry propositional content and how they can be analysed to retrieve the content embedded in them; a successful translation is the obtaining of correctness and truthfulness. In such a case faithfulness involves an exact translation at the level of content of thinking, not only of its forms. Considering this fact any translation becomes the initial act of hermeneutics (analysis of the text); the translator interprets and translates or to put it differently any translation involves interpretation; the translator has to clear up things when he has to face any special difficulty, he has to explain making competent commentaries, so that the reader can grasp the essence of author’s thinking.