The translation shift approach linguistic approaches to the analysis of translation

Translation shifts =small linguistic changes occurring in translation of ST to TT.

Since the 1950s there has been a variety of linguistic approaches to the analysis of translation that have proposed detailed lists or taxonomies in an effort to categorize the translation process. The focus in this chapter is on the following three models:

1. Vinay and Darbelnet's taxonomy (1958) which is the classical model and one which has had a very wide impact; 2 Catford's (1965) linguistic approach, which included the introduction of the term 'shift' of translation; 3 van Leuven-Zwart's (1989, 1990) very detailed model, designed for the analysis of the key concept of small 'microlevel' translation shifts and the gauging of their effect on the more general 'macrolevel'.

Vinay and Darbelnet's model Vinay and Darbelnet carried out a comparative stylistic analysis of French and English. They looked at texts in both languages, noting differences between the languages and identifying different translation strategies and 'procedures'

The two general translation strategies identified by Vinay and Darbelnet (2000: 84-93) are direct translation and oblique translation, which hark back to the 'literal vs. free' division discussed in chapter 2. Indeed, 'literal' is given by the authors as a synonym for direct translation. The two strategies comprise seven procedures, of which direct translation covers three:

1. Borrowing: The SL word is transferred directly to the TL 1. Borrowing: The SL word is transferred directly to the TL. This grouping covers words such as the Russian rouble, or more recently, glasnost and perestroika, that are used in English and other languages to fill a semantic gap in the TL.

2.Calque /kælk/. : This is 'a special kind of borrowing‘ where the SL expression or structure is transferred in a literal translation. Vinay and Darbelnet note that both borrowings and calques often become fully integrated into the TL, although sometimes with some semantic change, which can turn them into false friends

3.Literal translation: This is 'word-for-word' translation, which Vinay and Darbelnet describe as being most common between languages of the same family and culture.

Literal translation is the authors' prescription for good translation: 'literalness should only be sacrificed because of structural and metalinguistic requirements and only after checking that the meaning is fully preserved' (1995: 288).'

But, say Vinay and Darbelnet , the translator may judge literal translation to be 'unacceptable' because it: (a) gives a different meaning; (b) has no meaning; (c) is impossible for structural reasons; (d) 'does not have a corresponding expression within the metalinguistic experience of the TL'; (e) corresponds to something at a different level of language.

In those cases where literal translation is not possible, Vinay and Darbelnet say that the strategy of oblique translation must be used. This covers a further four procedures:

1.Transposition: This is a change of one part of speech for another without changing the sense. Vinay and Darbelnet see transposition as 'probably the most common structural change undertaken by translators'. They list at least ten different categories, such as: verb -+ noun: ' adverb -+ verb: e.g. It is sunny الدنيا شمس

2. Modulation: This changes the semantics and point of view of the SL 2.Modulation: This changes the semantics and point of view of the SL. Modulation is a procedure that is justified, 'when, although a literal, or even transposed, translation results in a grammatically correct utterance, it is considered unsuitable, unidiomatic or awkward in the TL'

Vinay and Darbelnet place much store by modulation as 'the touchstone of a good translator', whereas transposition 'simply shows a very good command of the target language' (1995: 246). Modulation at the level of message is subdivided (pp. 246-55) along the following lines:

abstract for concrete cause-effect part-whole part-another part reversal of terms negation of opposite active to passive (and vice versa) space for time rethinking of intervals and limits (in space and time) change of symbol (including fixed and new metaphors).

3. Equivalence: Vinay and Darbelnet use this term to refer to cases where languages describe the same situation by different stylistic or structural means. Equivalence is particularly useful in translating idioms and proverbs (the sense, though not the image).

In her article ‘Equivalence in Translation: Between Myth and Reality’, Leonardi (2000) mentions that Vinay and Darbelnet view equivalence-oriented translation as a procedure which involves repeating the same image or situation as in the source language, while using completely different wording….

They conclude that “the need for creating equivalences arises from the situation, and it is in the situation of the SL text that translators have to look for a solution” (ibid: 255). They argue that even if the semantic equivalent of an expression in the SL text is quoted in a dictionary or a glossary, it is not enough, and it does not guarantee a successful translation. They provide a number of examples to support their theory

They argue, for example, that ‘Take one’ is a fixed expression which would have as an equivalent French translation ‘Prenez-en un’. However, if the expression appeared as a notice next to a basket of free samples in a large store, the translator would have to look for an equivalent term in a similar situation and use the expression ‘Échantillon gratuit’ (ibid: 255-256).

It seems that what Vinay and Darbelnet call equivalence is roughly similar to what Newmarks calls communicative translation, “where in a given situation, the ST uses an SL expression standard for that situation, and that the TT uses a TL expression standard for an equivalent target culture situation”

4. Adaptation :This involves changing the cultural reference when a situation in the source culture does not exist in the target culture. It is mainly a procedure appropriate to particular circumstances such as translating plays for the stage, which aims to achieve a particular kind of equivalence that can be appreciated within the TL culture. Consequently, the themes, characters, plots are usually preserved, while

the ST culture is converted to the TL culture and the text rewritten the ST culture is converted to the TL culture and the text rewritten. There are several literary masterpieces that have been adapted from their SLs into TLs ,e.g. most Shakespearean plays have been adapted into Arabic for the stage and the popular “The Thousand and One Nights” has also been adapted into English and many other languages.

Vinay and Darbelnet continue by giving a list of five steps for the translator to follow in moving from ST to TT; these are: 1 Identify the units of translation. 2 Examine the SL text, evaluating the descriptive, affective and intellectual content of the units. 3 Reconstruct the metalinguistic context of the message. 4 Evaluate the stylistic effects. 5 Produce and revise the TT.