Lesson 1

BASIC FEATURES OF TRANSLATION

OBJECTIVES

At the end of the lesson, you will

- identify the meaning of the terms ‘theory of translation’ and ‘translation
studies’
- be aware of the basic features of translation
- be aware of the nature of translation
- be aware of the relationship of meaning, style and culture
- identify the types of equivalents of correlated units of translation
- be aware of the tasks of the translator

I. WHAT IS THE THEORY OF TRANSLATION?

It is assumed that before the 1970s the term ‘translation’ used to be thought of
particularly as a discipline in the process of foreign language learning; it was rarely
studied for its own sake. What is generally understood as translation involves the
rendering of a source language text into the target text, ensuring that (1) the surface
meaning of the two will be approximately similar and (2) the structures of the
source language will be preserved as closely as possible but not so closely that the
target language structure will be seriously distorted. The instructor can then hope
to measure the students’ linguistic competence by means of the target language
products. But there the matter stops (Susan Bassnett, 2002). In the light of this
direction, the theory of translation involves normative approaches, putting a strong
emphasis on prescribing to translators how to and how not to translate.

Together with the term ‘translation theory’ or ‘theory of translation’, since the mid-
1970s the name ‘Translation Studies’ has been adopted to indicate that the study of
translation is not just a minor branch of comparative literary study, nor yet a
specific area of linguistics, but a vastly complex field with many far-reaching
fields: stylistics, literary history, linguistics, semiotics, aesthetics, and practical
applications in translation. Translation Studies, indeed a discipline in its own right,
aims to produce a comprehensive theory which can be used as a guideline for the
production of translations, and during the actual translation process the problems
encountered by those working in the field will enrich their practical experience for
theoretical discussions, and then increased theoretical perceptiveness will be put to
use in the translation of texts.

Practically, whether the study of translation is termed as ‘Translation Theory’ or

‘Translation Studies’ it culminates with the theory on proper principles of
translation. This theory, based on a solid foundation on understanding of how
languages work, translation theory recognizes that different languages encode
meaning in differing forms, yet guides translators to find appropriate ways of
preserving meaning, while using the most appropriate forms of each language.
Translation theory includes principles for translating figurative language, dealing
with lexical mismatches, rhetorical questions, inclusion of cohesion markers, and
many other topics crucial to good translation.

Basically there are two competing theories of translation. In one, the predominant
purpose is to express as exactly as possible the full force and meaning of every
word and phrase in the original, and in the other the predominant purpose is to
produce a result that does not read like a translation at all, but rather moves in its
new dress with the same ease as in its native rendering. In the hands of a good
translator neither of these two approaches can ever be entirely ignored.

II. DEFINITIONS OF TRANSLATION

Since antiquity (3000BC-Newmark 1986), translation has become popular in

language learning and daily life. So far, there have been many definitions of
translation, and the following are some of them:

1. Translation, by dictionary definition, consists of changing from one state or

form to another, to turn into one’s own or another’s language. (The Merriam-
Webster Dictionary, 1974). Translation is basically a change of form. When we
speak of the form of a language, we are referring to the actual words, phrases,
sentences, paragraphs, etc. The forms are referred to as the surface structure of a
language. It is the structural part of language which is actually seen in print or
heard in speech. In translation the form of the source language is replaced by the
form of the receptor/target language. But how is this change accomplished? What
determines the choices of form in the translation?

2. Translation is the expression in another language (target language) of what has

been expressed in one language (source language), preserving semantic and
stylistic equivalencies.

3. Translation is the replacement of a representation of a text in one language by a

representation of an equivalent text in a second language.

4. Translation is rendering a written text into another language in a way that the
author intended the text.

5. Translators are concerned with written texts. They render written texts from one
language into another language. Translators are required to translate texts which
arrange from simple items including birth certificates or driving licenses to more
complex written materials such as articles in journals of various kinds, business
contracts and legal documents.”

6. Translating may be defined as the process of transforming signs or

representations into other signs or representations. If the originals have some
significance, we generally require that their images also have the same
significance, or, more realistically, as nearly the same significance as we can get.
Keeping significance invariant is the central problem in translating between natural
languages.

7. Translation may be defined as follows: the replacement of textual material in

one language (SI.) by equivalent material in another language (TL).

8. One of the most important factors determining the purpose of a translation is the
addressee, who is the intended receiver or audience of the target text with their
culture-specific world-knowledge, their expectations and their communicative
needs. Every translation is directed at an intended audience, since to translate
means “to produce a text in a target setting for a target purpose and target
addressees in target circumstances".

9. Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural

equivalent of the source-language message.

10. Translation leads from a source-language text to a target-language text which is

as close an equivalent as possible and presupposes an understanding of the content
and style of the original.

11. When the translation is an end in itself, in the sense of simply seeking to extend
an originally monolingual communicative process to include receivers in another
language, then it must be conceived as an integral communicative performance,
which without any extratextual additions (notes, explanations etc.) provides an
insight into the cognitive meaning, linguistic form and communicative function of
the SL text.

12. The linguistic approaches basically saw translating as a code-switching

operation. With the more pragmatic reorientation at the beginning of the 1970s, the
focus shifted from the word or phrase to the text as a unit of translation, but the
fundamental linguistic trend was not broken. Equivalence as a basic concept or
even constituent of translation was never really questioned.

13. The ideal translation would be one "in which the aim in the TL [target
language] is equivalence as regards the conceptual content, linguistic form and
communicative function of a SL [source-language] text". The requirement of
equivalence thus has the following form: quality (or qualities) X in the SL text
must be preserved. This means that the source-language content, form, style,
function, etc. must be preserved, or at least that the translation must seek to
preserve them as far as possible.
Translation has its own excitement, its own interest. A satisfactory translation is
always possible, but a good translator is never satisfied with it. It can usually be
improved. There is no such thing as a perfect, ideal or 'correct' translation. A
translator is always trying to extend his knowledge and improve his means of
expression; he is always pursuing facts and words. He works on four levels:
translation is first a science, which entails the knowledge and verification of the
facts and the language that describes them - here, what is wrong, mistakes of truth,
can be identified; secondly, it is a skill, which calls for appropriate language and
acceptable usage; thirdly, an art, which distinguishes good from undistinguished
writing and is the creative, the intuitive, sometimes the inspired, level of the
translation; lastly, a matter of taste, where argument ceases, preferences are
expressed, and the variety of meritorious translations is the reflection of individual
differences. The study of translation can set up a framework of reference for an
activity that serves as a means of communication, a transmitter of culture, a
technique (one of many, to be used with discretion) of language learning, and a
source of personal pleasure.

III. THE NATURE OF TRANSLATION

According to Nida (1982) translating consists in reproducing in the receptor
language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in
terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. But this relatively simple
statement requires careful evaluation of several seemingly contradictory
elements.

3.1. Reproducing the Message 

Translating must aim primarily at “reproducing the message.” To do
anything else is essentially false to one’s task as a translator. But to reproduce
the message one must make a good many grammatical and lexical
adjustments. Translation equivalence is defined as a measure of semantic
and structural similarity between correlated units in the two texts (ST and
TT). Some of the SL units have permanent equivalents in TL, that is to say,
there is a one-to-one correspondence between such units and their equivalents.
Thus book or machine-gun is always rendered as sách and súng máy. As a rule
this type of correspondence is found with words of specific character, such as
scientific and technical terms, proper or geographical names and similar
words whose meaning is more or less independent of the particular
contextual situation. However, if we compare a number of TTs with their STs
we shall discover that the degree of semantic similarity between the two texts
involved in the translating process may vary. In other words the equivalence
between ST and TT may be based on the reproduction of different parts of the ST
contents. For example, the Hebrew idiom “bowels of mercies” cannot be literally
rendered into English if one really wants to communicate the message of the
source language, for though we have the words “bowels” and mercy” in English,
we simply do not employ this combination. A meaningful equivalent is "tender
compassion,” and it is precisely in this manner that many translations attempt to
reproduce the significance of this source-language expression.

3.1.1. Equivalence rather than Identity 

The translator must strive for equivalence rather than identity. In a sense
this is just another way of emphasizing the reproduction of the message
rather than the conservation of the form of the utterance, but it reinforces the
need for radical alteration of a phrase such as I think or in my opinion which may
be quite meaningless. In other instances, one may use some more natural
transitions, e.g., you know, and then, now, later...; words or phrases of this kind
are sometimes best not reproduced. Take the following as another example: the
sentence Nam là sinh viên can be translated as Nam is a student, but in English
the word student can mean a school, a university, or a Master or even a Ph.D,
student whereas in Vietnamese it just means a university student. In addition, in
Vietnamese there is no article indicating whether a noun is count or noncount,
and definite or indefinite as in English.

What is important here, therefore, is that equivalence is looked upon as a

relation not only between two actual texts but also between two languages
and to distinguish between the two types of relation Catford (1965) uses the term
textual equivalence (between two texts) and formal correspondent (between
two languages). Formal correspondent is any target language category “which
can be said to occupy, as nearly as possible, the same ‘place’ in the ‘economy’ of
the target language category occupies in the SL” (Catford 1965:27)

3.1.2. Dynamic Equivalence over Formal Correspondence

So far to the point equivalence in translation is considered mainly in terms of form
and meaning (semantic and grammatical). However, over the past years,
translation scholars have focused more on the communicative function than
on the notion of equivalence of the target text. the translator is seen as a
bilingual communicator in an intercultural situation. According to Hymes
(1972) a translator can produce utterances which, apart from being
grammatical, are also appropriate in the given socio-cultural circumstances.
Translation scholars of this school try to characterise equivalence in terms of
function of some sort. Nida (1964), for example, considers the linguistic sign not
as a carrier of linguistic meaning in the first place but as an entity fulfilling a
certain function in a given society. He puts the emphasis on there being a dynamic
equivalence between the translation and the original, by which he means that the
manner in which the target reader responds to the target text must be the same as
that in which the source reader responded to the source text. (equivalent effect).
Equivalence is thus treated here as a functional rather than a formal category. In
this view, linguistic items need to be considered in actual contexts, not in isolation,
carrying communicative rather than abstract value only. As a result of the shift of
attention from the source text as the standard of comparison to the role of the target
text in the target-culture situation functional adequacy can replace formal
equivalence. For this reason, if we look at translations in terms of the receptors,
rather than in terms of their respective forms, then we introduce another point
of view; the intelligibility of the translation. Such intelligibility is not, however, to
be measured merely in terms of whether the words are understandable and the
sentences grammatically constructed, but in terms of the total impact the message
has on the one who receives it.

Dynamic equivalence is therefore to be defined in terms of the degree to which

the receptors of the message in the receptor language respond to it in
substantially the same manner as the receptors in the source language. This
response can never be identical, for the cultural and historical settings are too
different, but there should be a high degree of equivalence of response, or the
translation will have failed to accomplish its purpose.

It would be wrong to think, however, that the response of the receptors in the
second language is merely in terms of comprehension of the information, for
communication is not merely informative. It must also be expressive and
imperative if it is to serve the principal purposes of communications.

3.2. A Natural Equivalent 

Natural refers to three areas of the communication process: a natural rendering
should fit the whole receptor language and culture, the context of the specific
message, and the receptor-language audience. Therefore the translation should bear
no obvious trace of a foreign origin. A natural translation would have to deal with
two main areas of adaptation, that is grammar and lexicon. The grammatical
adaptation takes place more readily since one is obliged to make adjustments such
as shifting word order or using nouns instead of verbs in the receptor language.
The lexical structure of the source message is less easily adjusted to the semantic
requirements of the receptor language because there are no strict grammatical rules
but a variety of options.

The best translation does not sound like a translation. Quite naturally one cannot
and should not make a story that happened in the last century sound as if it
happened just some days ago. In other words, a good translation of the story must
not be a “cultural translation.” Rather, it is a “linguistic translation.” Nevertheless,
this does not mean that it should exhibit in its grammatical and stylistic forms any
trace of awkwardness or strangeness. That is to say, it should studiously avoid
“translationese” - formal fidelity, with resulting unfaithfulness to the content and
the impact of the message.

IV. THE RELATIONSHIP OF MEANING, STYLE AND CULTURE

4.1. Significance of Meaning
As has already been indicated in the definitions of translating, meaning must be
given priority, for it is the content of the message which is of prime
importance in translating. Working in this way one may have formal
consistency of word, phrase, and clause order (word order is, however, more
difficult to retain than phrase or clause order), length of sentences, and classes of
words, e.g., translating  nouns by nouns and verbs by verbs. All of these formal
features combine to produce what is called “formal correspondence.” However,
when we speak of verbal consistency in translating, we focus primary attention
upon the way in which specific words are translated, but words are not the only
formal features involved in formal consistency. Since words cover areas of
meaning and are not mere points of meaning, and since in different
languages the semantic areas of corresponding words are not identical, it is
inevitable that the choice of the right word in the receptor language to
translate a word in the source-language text depends more on the context
than upon a fixed system of verbal consistency, i.e., always translating one
word in the source language by a corresponding word in the receptor language.
It is one thing to demonstrate in a practical way that strict verbal consistency may
result in serious distortion of the meaning, but quite another thing to understand
precisely why this is true. Basically, contextual consistency should be
prioritized to result in natural translation. The linguistic reasons are that (1)
each language covers all of experience with a set of verbal
symbols, i.e., words to designate various features of experience, and (2) each
language is different from all other languages in the ways in which the sets of
verbal symbols classify the various elements of experience.

4.2. The Significance of Style 

Though style is secondary to content, it is nevertheless important. One should not
translate poetry as though it were prose, nor expository material as though it were
straight narrative. In trying to reproduce the style of the original one must beware,
however, of producing something which is not functionally equivalent.

As for different scales in reading texts the translator should realize, Peter
Newmark (1988) points out that the average text for translation tends to be for an
educated, middle-class readership in an informal, not colloquial style. The most
common variety of 'marked' error in register among student translators tends to be
colloquial and intimate, e.g. use of phrases such as more and more for
increasingly, job for work; and excessively familiar phrasal verbs get out of, get
rid of. The other common error, use of formal or official register, e.g. decease for
death, also shows signs of translationese. All this will help you to decide on the
degree of formality, generality (or specificity) and emotional tone you must
express when you work on the text. The scale of formality has been variously
expressed, notably by Martin Joos and Strevens. Peter Newmark suggests the
following styles the translator should be familiar with to make the right choice:
Officialese 'The consumption of any nutriments whatsoever is categoric
ally prohibited in this establishment.'
Official The consumption of nutriments is prohibited.'
Formal 'You are requested not to consume food in this establishment.'
Neutral 'Eating is not allowed here.'
Informal 'Please don't eat here.'
Colloquial 'You can't feed your face here.'
Slang 'Layoffthenosh.'
Taboo 'Lay off the fucking nosh.'

4.3. The Importance of Culture

Some difficulties can arise when translating. One key factor is cultural sensitivity:
Not only do translators have to communicate the message from the source
language into the target language, but they also have to take into account the
culture of the target language. In order to avoid misunderstandings, translators
have to look out for the lexical content and syntax, as well as ideologies, value
systems and ways of life in a given culture – translators need to know their
audience in both languages and also consider the variants of the target language,
like European French and Canadian French, among other things.

There are a variety of cultural elements to take into consideration when starting a
translation. For example, the name of a company or a product, humor, material
culture such as names of food, the style of the language and the target audience,
pictures, symbols, colors, gestures, habits, traditions as well as cultural references
are important cultural factors for translators to consider in order to correctly
convey a cultural equivalent in the target language. Beyond their linguistic
expertise, they need to have a thorough understanding of the culture of the source
language as well as that of the target language. At times, a text with cultural
implications may lose some meaning in translation or information may have to be
added because it is impossible to communicate all the levels of meaning that a
cultural reference may imply.

The role of the translator is to facilitate the transfer of message, meaning and
cultural elements from one language into another and create an equivalent response
from the receivers. The message in the source language is embedded a cultural
context and has to be transferred to the target language (Nida 1964: 13).

V. TYPES OF EQUIVALENTS OF CORRELATED UNITS

The structural similarity of ST and TT implies that relationships of equivalence are

established between correlated units in the two texts. Depending on the type of the
language units involved regular equivalents can be classified as lexical,
phraseological or grammatical. The choice of the equivalent will depend on the
relative importance of a particular semantic element in the act of communication.

Some of the SL units have permanent equivalents in TL, that is to say, there is a
one-to-one correspondence between such units and their equivalents. Thus Canada
in Vietnamese is Canada, a machine-gun as súng máy and water is nước. As a rule
this type of correspondence is found with words of specific character, such as
scientific and technical terms, proper or geographical names and similar words
whose meaning is more or less independent of the particular contextual situation.

Other SL units may have several equivalents each. Such one-to-many

correspondence between SL and TL units is characteristic of most regular
equivalents. The existence of a number of non-permanent (or variable)
equivalents to a SL units implies the necessity of selecting one of them in each
particular case, taking into account the way the unit is used in ST and the points of
difference between the semantics of its equivalents in TL.

A variety of equivalents may also result from a more detailed description of the
same object in TL. The English word “attitude”, for instance, is translated
differently depending on the variant the Vietnamese language prefers in a
particular situation. Here the choice between equivalents is determined by TL
factors. Sometimes even if a SL unit has a regular equivalent in TL, this equivalent
cannot be used in TT whenever the unit is found in ST. An equivalent is but a
potential substitute, for the translator’s choice is, to a large extent, dependent on
the context in which the SL unit is placed in ST. There are two types of context:
linguistic and situational. The linguistic context is made up by the other SL units
in ST while the situational context includes the temporal, spatial and other
circumstances under which ST was produced as well as all facts which the receptor
is expected to know so that he could adequately interpret the message.

Thus in the following sentences the linguistic context will enable the translator to
make a correct choice among the Vietnamese equivalents to the English noun
“attitude”:
(1) I don’t like your attitude to your work. (cách thức)
(2) There is no sign of any change in the attitudes of the two sides. (thái độ)
(3) He stood there in a threatening attitude. (vẻ)

Different situational contexts affect the choice of word equivalence, too. The verb
“like”, for instance, in the sentence I like orange juice can be translated as “thích”
to describe a habit, but as “uống” in response to the question What do you like for
a drink? and as “chọn” to the question What would you like, coffee or orange
juice?

The same can be said of idioms; the meaning of the English “Do in Rome as the
Romans do” may be rendered in different contexts as Nhập gia tùy tục, Đi với bụt
mặc áo cà sa đi với ma mặc áo giấy, or Ở đâu phải theo đấy; and to get up on the
wrong side of the bed as trái tính trái nết, or giận dữ, buồn bực, không vui vô cớ.
As the result, English idioms may have several Vietnamese equivalents among
which the translator has to make his choice in each particular case. However, the
fact that a SL unit has a number of regular equivalents does not necessarily mean
that one of them will be used in each particular translation. True, in many cases the
translator’s skill is well demonstrated in his ability to make a good choice among
such equivalents.

The same can be said of grammar. The choice of grammatical units in TT largely
depends on the semantics and combinability of its lexical elements. Therefore there
are practically no permanent grammatical equivalents. The variable equivalents in
the field of grammar may be analogous forms in TL or different forms with a
similar meaning.

No small number of SL units have no regular equivalents in TL such as the English

words hotdog, condominium, classifier.... . Some grammar forms and categories
may also be equivalent-lacking (Cf. the English tense form, article, plural form
which have no counterparts in Vietnamese). However, the absence of regular
equivalents does not imply that the meaning of an equivalent-lacking SL unit
cannot be rendered in translation or that its translation must be less accurate. We
have seen that words with regular equivalents are not infrequently translated with
the help of contextual substitutes. Similarly, the translator, coming across an
equivalent-lacking units, resorts to occasional equivalents which can be created in
one of the following ways:

(1) Using loan-words imitating in TL the form of the SL word or word

combination, or using an explanation to convey the meaning of the SL unit
followed by a foot-note explaining the meaning of the equivalent-lacking word in
ST.e.g. hotdog (English) > hotdog (Vietnamese).

(2) Using approximate substitutes (approximate translation) when the translator

makes use of a TL form partially equivalent to the equivalent-lacking SL unit: hear
smb > nghe thấy ai đó nói, amid rising prices > trong bối cảnh giá cả tăng. If
necessary, with the help of foot-notes the translator can use TL words with similar
meaning which is extended to convey additional information, e.g. drugstore: hiệu
thuốc as it is not exactly a drugstore where they also sell such items as magazines,
soft drinks, ice-cream, etc.

(3) Using transformations (transformational translation) (nouns into verbs, phrases

into clauses..., e.g., Your presence at the meeting is not obligatory: Không bắt buộc
cậu phải có mặt trong cuộc họp đó.

(4) Zero translations when the meaning of the grammatical unit is not rendered in
the translation since it is non-existent in TL or practically identical to the meaning
of some other unit and can be safely left out. For example, the sentence It is late
may be rendered

as Muộn rồi in Vietnamese since there is not anything that corresponds to It is in

the sentences and the sentence I have never seen such a horrible scene as Tôi chưa
bao giờ nhìn thấy cảnh hãi hùng như vậy; since the words từ trước tới giờ would
be made superfluous by the presence of chưa bao giờ that implies time duration
since the past upto now.

As has been emphasized, equivalents are not mechanical substitutes for SL units
but they may come handy as a starting point in search of adequate translation. The
translator will much profit if he knows many permanent equivalents, and will be
good at selecting among variable equivalents and resourceful at creating
occasional equivalents, taking into account all contextual factors.

VI. WHAT DOES THE TRANSLATOR DO?

Conventionally, it is suggested that in order to perform their job successfully,

translators should meet three important requirements; they should be familiar with:

 the source language

 the target language
 the subject matter
Based on this premise, the translator discovers the meaning behind the forms in the
source language and does his best to produce the same meaning in the target
language - using the forms and structures of the target language. Consequently,
what is supposed to change is the form and the code and what should remain
unchanged is the meaning and the message. (Larson, 1984)

The translator should understand perfectly the content and intention of the author
whom he is translating. The principal way to reach it is reading all the sentences or
the text completely so that you can give the idea that you want to say in the target
language because the most important characteristic of this technique is translating
the message as clearly and naturally as possible. If the translation is for a different
country, the translator should translate the cultural words of that country
appropriately. For example if he/she has to translate hotdog into Vietnamese, of
course, since there is no equivalent of the concept, the translator might say
“hotdog” or might have to go all the way up to the superordinate category of it,
saying “xúc xích nóng”. In this case it is really important for the translator to
understand cultural words because if the translator does not, his/her translation will
be misunderstood.

Also, the translator should have a perfect knowledge of the language from which
he is translating and an equally excellent knowledge of the language into which he
is translating. At this point the translator must have a wide knowledge in both
languages for getting the equivalence in the target language, because the deficiency
of the knowledge of both languages will result in a translation without logic and
sense - translationese.  

The translator should avoid the tendency to translate word by word, because doing
so is to destroy the meaning of the original and to ruin the beauty of the expression.
This point is very important since if every word is translated literally it can
transmit another meaning or understanding in the translation.

The translator should employ the forms of speech in common usage. The translator
should bear in mind the people to whom the translation will be addressed and use
words that can be easily understood.
In short, in doing the job as a translator, he will much improve his performance if
he masters the dynamics of translations as described in the diagram below
(Newman, 1988):

9 The truth (the facts of the matter)

10 Translator

QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION - 1

1. What is the aim of translating?
2. What are the basic characteristics of translation, according to the definitions of
translation given above?
3. What is the nature of translation?
4. Point out the different kinds of equivalents in translation.
5. What qualities do you think a translator needs to have to do the job based on the
characteristics described in your definition?
6. Point out the basic tasks the translator must perform in the job. Give examples.

PRACTICE 1
I. Comment on the translation of the following sentences and give your own
translation of them
Example: 0. My dad was fixing the roof and the ladder slipped out from
under him and he is hanging from the eaves (Lúc đó bố tôi đang
 sửa mái nhà, bỗng nhiên chiếc thang dưới chân ông bị đổ và
bây giờ ông đang treo lơ lửng trên xà nhà).
Your translation: Bố tôi đang dọi lại mái nhà thì bỗng nhiên thang đổ và
giờ đây ông đang bị lơ lửng dưới xà nhà.
1. A man’s wife had scratched the side of their new car as she backed it out of
the garage (Vợ một người nọ làm xước một bên thành xe hơi lúc bà ta lùi xe
để ra khỏi nhà để xe).
2. A man was injured in an accident aboard a bus, and his friends told him that
he should sue for damages (Một người ngồi trên xe buýt và lúc xảy ra tai
nạn, anh ta bị thương. Bạn bè khuyên anh ta đi kiện vì các thiệt hại).
3. A crew was unloading a tank car of highly explosive chemicals when it
exploded (Một toán người dỡ một chiếc xe chở hóa chất dễ cháy, đang làm
thì bị nổ).
4. Her grandmother, willing to break her neck to please her little
granddaughter, took away the cereal and went to work preparing a bacon and
egg breakfast (Muốn chiều cháu, bà cất bát ngũ cốc đi rồi làm món thịt hun
và trứng cho cháu).
5. Even though he had made a lot of money with several inventions, some of
his neighbours thought he was a bit of an oddball. Being rich, they referred
to him as eccentric (Mặc dù ông kiếm được nhiều tiền nhờ có nhiều sáng
chế, một số láng giềng cho rằng đầu óc ông ta không bình thường. Thậm chí
họ còn bảo ông là dở người).

II. Underline (single line – ) the subject and (double line =) the verb predicate of
all the sentences. Then, translate the story into English, paying special attention to
the italicized parts.
Sinh viên của một trường đại học Mỹ thường (1) chơi khăm nhau khi bạn
gái mới của một sinh viên nào đó (2) đến chơi lần đầu. Thường thì họ mang tất cả
đồ đạc ra khỏi phòng của người sinh viên đó, (3) để cho khi cô bạn của anh ấy đến
sẽ không có vật gì để ngồi.
Ted Jones là một thanh niên nông thôn, (4) cho đến khi được nhận vào đại
học, chưa bao giờ rời quê. Lần đầu đến trường và khi nghe nói về sự nghịch ngợm
này, anh ta tỏ ra không thích và tuyên bố với các sinh viên khác, “Tôi nhất định
rằng điều đó sẽ không xảy ra với tôi. Tôi sẽ khóa cửa phòng lại.” Các sinh viên
khác đều (5) cười trước lời lẽ tự tin của anh.
Lần đầu tiên khi Ted đưa bạn gái về phòng, anh kinh ngạc thấy tất cả đồ đạc
vẫn còn đó nhưng (6) cửa phòng đã bị lấy đi mất.
(Key words: chơi khăm ai: play tricks on; lần đầu: for the first time; để cho: so that; cho đến...
vẫn chưa: not until; cười trước cái gì: laugh at; lấy, gỡ cái gì: remove sth)

III. State the kinds of equivalents you will use in the phrases in bold type when
translating the following text
By the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century a number of our
Eastern institutions – Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Pennsylvania – had some of
(1) the necessary ingredients of a university, but hardly yet the point of view.
They were (2) little clusters of schools and institutes. Indeed, just after the
Revolution, the schools of Pennsylvania and Harvard had assumed the somewhat
pretentious title of university, and, shortly after, the University of Virginia was
founded under the guidance of Thomas Jefferson. (3) In the South, Georgia and
later North Carolina began (4) to rise. (5) The substance in all these was mainly
lacking though the title was honored. (6) There were rather feeble law, medical,
and divinity schools, somewhat loosely attached to (7) those colleges. It has been
(8) commonly recognized, however, that the first decade after (9) the close of the
Civil War, that is, from about 1866 to 1876, was (10) the great early flowering of
the university idea in America.

IV. Define the kinds of equivalents used in the numbered phrases of the translated
text below

There are roughly three New Yorks. Sơ bộ có 3 trong một thành phố New
There is, first, the New York of (1) the York. Thứ nhất, đó là thành phố của
man or woman who was born there, những người sinh ra ở đó, những người
who (2) takes the city for granted and coi nơi đó là lẽ đương nhiên không thể
accepts its size and (3) its turbulence as né tránh, họ chấp nhận quy mô và cuộc
natural and inevitable. Second, there is sống náo nhiệt của nó. Thứ hai, đó là
the New York of the commuter – the thành phố New York của những người
city that is (4) devoured by locusts each đến rồi lại đi vào mỗi ngày và mỗi đêm.
day and each night. Third, there is the Thứ ba, đó là thành phố của những
New York of the person who was born người sinh ra ở nơi khác và đến đó vì sự
somewhere else and came to New York kiếm tìm. Trong cả 3 thành phố đều náo
in quest of something. Of these three (5) nhiệt này thì thành phố thứ ba là đông
trembling cities the greatest is the last – nhất, bởi đây là điểm đến cuối cùng, là
the city of final destination, the city that đích đến. Chính thành phố thứ ba này đã
is a goal. It is the third city that accounts đem lại địa vị cao sang, dáng vẻ thơ
for New York’s (6) high-strung mộng, sự hết mình vì nghệ thuật và
disposition, its poetical deportment, its những thành quả không gì so sánh được
dedication to the arts, and its của New York. Nếu những người đến
incomparable achievements. Commuters rồi lại đi đem lại cho New York sự nhộn
give the city (7) its tidal restlessness; nhịp thăng trầm, thì những người vốn
natives give it solidarity and continuity, sinh ra ở đó đem lại cho thành phố sự
but the settlers give it passion. And đoàn kết và sự kết nối, còn những người
whether it is a farmer arriving from a định cư lại mang tới đây một sự đam
small grocery store in a slum, or a mê. Cho dù đó là anh nông dân đến từ
young girl arriving from a small town in một của hàng rau quả nhỏ trong một túp
Mississippi to (8) escape the indignity lều hay một cô gái trẻ đến từ một thị
of being observed by her neighbors, or trấn nhỏ vùng Mississipi nhằm tránh
by a boy arriving from the Corn Belt cảm giác xúc phạm bị những người
with (9) a manuscript and a pain in his xung quanh nhòm ngó hoặc đó là người
heart, it makes no difference; each (10) con trai đến từ miền Corn Belt mang
embraces New York with the intense trong lòng nỗi đau hay niềm hy vọng thì
excitement of first love, each (11) tất cả cũng đều giống nhau, mỗi người
absorbs New York with the fresh eyes đến New York đều mang trong lòng
of an adventurer, each (12) generates niềm phấn khích mạnh mẽ của tình yêu
heat and light to dwarf the ban đầu, mỗi người đều ngưỡng mộ
Consolidated Edison Company. New York bằng con mắt tươi tắn của
người khám phá, mỗi người đều sản
sinh ra nhiệt lượng và ánh sáng làm lu
“The Three New Yorks,” E.B. White. Here Is mờ hình ảnh của công ty năng lượng
New York Consolidated Edison Company.
V. Translate the text below into Vietnamese
Perhaps the most powerful woman in media today is Oprah Winfrey. To
quote an old TV commercial, when she talks, people listen, and they've been
listening in record numbers since her daytime talk show debuted in 1986. Since
then, she has covered a broad range of topics, from family issues and drug abuse
to celebrity profiles. A shrewd businesswoman, Oprah has inspired trends in the
marketplace simply by mentioning a product on the air. On top of all this, she has
battled with her weight and won while motivating many to "Make the
Connection". Oprah has championed literacy and inspired thousands to read. As a
result, she has single handedly propelled unknown authors to the top of the best
seller list.
All this power did not come easily, however. Born in a small town in rural
Mississippi on January 29th 1954, Oprah had a difficult childhood and endured
sexual abuse. She eventually overcome it all and at age 19 she landed her first job
as a radio reporter in Nashville Tennessee, where she attended college. In her
sophomore year she became the first African American anchor at WTVF TV in
Nashville. After that it was only a matter of time until she was hosting a talk show
in Baltimore which led to her transfer to Chicago in 1984. Then, in 1985 she
received an Oscar nomination for her role in The Color Purple.

RECOMMENDED READING - 1
1. Al-Shabab,O.S. (1994). Interpretation and the Language of Translation:
Creativity and Conventions in Translation. Beirut, Lebanon.
2. Bassnett, S. (2001). Translation Studies. New York: Mathuen & Co.Ltd.
3. Christiane, N. Translating as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester, UK &
Northampton MA.
4. Dự, Nguyễn Hữu. (2003). Tuyển tập truyện cười-Tập II. Nhà xuất bản
Đồng Nai.
5. Gaddis, R.M. Translation Spectrum - Essays in Theory and Practice. State
University of New York Press.
6. Larson, M.L. (1998). Meaning-based Translation. University Press of
America Inc.
7. Nida, A. E. (1982). The Theory and Practice of Translation. The Netherland:
E.J.Brill, Leiden
8 Nigel.A. Translation, Linguistics, Culture - French-English Handbook.
Multilingual Matters LTD. Clevedon • Buffalo • Toronto.
9. Newmark, P. 1986. Approach to Translation. Prentica Hall
10. Newmark, P. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall International
11. Wilss, W. Translation and Interpreting in the 20th Century. John Benjamins
Publishing company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
12. Tiến, Lê Hùng. Nghiên cứu dịch thuật và những khuynh hướng nghiên cứu
ngôn ngữ. Tạp chí KHOA HỌC ĐHQG - NGOẠI NGỮ T.XIX Số 1,
2006.