Scribd
Upload
28 views4 pages

J. Munday - Chapter 2

J munday's book chapter 2

Uploaded by

zehrasude07
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views4 pages

J. Munday - Chapter 2

J munday's book chapter 2

Uploaded by

zehrasude07
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Albayrak 1

J. Munday, Introducing Translation Studies

Chapter 2: Translation Theory before the Twentieth Century (pp. 18-34)


The pre-linguistics period of translation:
The word-for-word (literal) translation VERSUS The sense-for-sense (free) translation. This
distinction goes back to Cicero (1st century BC) and St Jerome (4th century AD).
Cicero translated the speeches of the Greek orators: “I did not hold it necessary to render
word for word, but I preserved the general style and force of the language.” Cicero disparaged
word-for-word translation.
St Jerome translated the Greek Old Testament into Latin. He describes his strategy in the
following terms: “Now I not only admit but freely announce that in translating from the Greek
- except of course in the case of the Holy Scripture, where even the syntax contains a mystery
- I render not word-for-word, but sense-for-sense” (translation). The sense-for-sense approach
allowed the sense of the ST (source text) to be translated.
The rich translation tradition of the Arab world in Baghdad in the Abbasid period (750-
1250): Greek scientific and philosophical material was translated into Arabic. They adopted
two translation methods. The first method consisted of translating each Greek word with an
equivalent Arabic word and, where none existed, borrowing the Greek word into Arabic. This
method proved unsuccessful, so they used the second method which consisted of translating
sense-for-sense, creating fluent target texts which conveyed the meaning of the original
without distorting the target language. Over the years the use of Arab neologisms increased
(rather than transliteration).
Martin Luther:
The Roman Catholic Church was preoccupied with the established meaning of the Bible and
its transmission. Any translation that diverged from the accepted interpretation was likely to
be considered heretical and to be censured or banned. For instance, Etienne Dolet was
burned at the stake having been condemned by the theological faculty of the Sorbonne
University in 1546. In his translation of Plato, he added the phrase rien du tout (nothing at all)
in a passage about what existed after death. This addition led to the charge of blasphemy and
he was executed.
Martin Luther translated the New Testament into German. He played a pivotal role in the
Reformation. He was accused of altering the Holy Scriptures in his translation. Luther
rejected the word-for-word approach. He infused the Bible with the language of ordinary
people.
The faithful interpreter: Fidelity, Spirit, Truth
At the end of the 17th century, the concept of fidelity came to be associated with faithfulness
to the meaning rather than the words of the author.
Kelly describes spirit as similarly having two meanings: the Latin word spiritus denotes
creative energy or inspiration, proper to literature, but St Augustine used it to mean the Holy
Spirit, and his contemporary used it in both senses.
Albayrak 2

For St Augustine, spirit and truth (veritas) were intertwined, with truth having the sense of
“content.” For St Jerome, truth meant the authentic Hebrew text to which he returned.
In the translation of the sacred texts, where the Word of God is paramount, there has been
such an interconnection of fidelity (to both the words and the perceived sense), spirit (the
energy of the words and the Holy Spirit) and truth (the content). However, by the seventeenth
century, spirit lost the religious sense it originally possessed and was thenceforth used solely
in the sense of creative energy.
The England of the seventeenth century marked an important step forward in translation
theory.
Cowley in his preface to Pindaric Odes attacks poetry that is converted faithfully and word
for word. He admits that he has taken, left out and added what he pleases to the odes. His free
method of translation permitted the spirit of the ST to be best reproduced.
John Dryden criticised Cowley’s free method. Dryden reduces all translation to three
categories:
1. metaphrase: word by word and line by line translation, which corresponds to literal
translation
2. paraphrase: translation with latitude, where the author is kept in view by the translator, so
as never to be lost, but his words are not so strictly followed as his sense. This involves
changing whole phrases and more or less corresponds to faithful or sense-for-sense
translation.
3. imitation: forsaking both words and sense. This corresponds to Cowley’s very free
translation and is more or less adaptation (Can Yücel’s adaptation-translation of
Shakespeare).
Dryden dismisses metaphrase and imitation, prefers paraphrase. He believes that metaphrase
is a foolish task and that imitation allows the translator to be more visible, but disrespects the
author.
The Valorisation of the Foreign:
The 17th century was concerned with imitation and the 18 th century was concerned about the
translator’s duty to recreate the spirit of the ST, yet the Romanticism of the early 19 th century
discussed the issues of translatability or untranslatability.
The German theologian and translator Friedrich Schleiermacher wrote a highly influential
treatise on translation. He is recognised as the founder of modern Protestant theology and of
modern hermeneutics, a Romantic approach to interpretation based not on absolute truth but
on the individual’s inner feeling and understanding.
He distinguishes two different types of translator working on two different types of text.
1. the Dolmetscher, who translates commercial texts
2. the Übersetzer, who works on scholarly and artistic texts
He believes that the übersetzer breathes new life into the language.
Albayrak 3

He prefers moving the reader towards the writer. To achieve this, the translator must adopt
an “alienating” (as opposed to “naturalising”) method of translation. The translator must
valorise the foreign and transfer that into the TL. This approach depends on the level of
education and understanding among the TT readership. A special language of translation may
be necessary for this approach, for example, compensating in one place with an imaginative
word.
The “alienating” and “naturalising” opposites are taken up by Venuti as “foreignization”
and “domestication”

Translation theory of the nineteenth and early twentieth century in Britain:


The polemic over the translation of Homer: Newman emphasised the foreignness of the work
by a deliberately archaic translation. Matthew Arnold advocated a transparent translation
method.
This elitist attitude led to the devaluation and marginalisation of translation. It was always
preferable to read the work in the original language. Therefore, very little popular literature is
translated into English, and relatively few subtitled foreign films are screened in mainstream
cinemas.

Towards contemporary translation theory:


Translation theory in the second half of the 20 th century made various attempts to put together
systematic taxonomies of translation phenomena.

Case study I: assessment criteria


The criteria for assessing the translation:
1. accuracy: the correct transfer of information and evidence of complete comprehension
2. the appropriate choice of vocabulary, idiom, terminology and register
3. cohesion, coherence and organisation
4. accuracy in technical aspects of punctuation
These criteria try to formalise clear rules for translation.

Case study II: the translator’s preface


Why did they revise the English translation (1920s) of Proust’s A la Recherche du Temps
Perdu?
The translator (1981): I have been obliged to be faithful to Proust’s meaning and tone of
voice. He criticises the previous translator for translating French idioms literally and sticking
Albayrak 4

too closely to the original syntax. He criticises the apparent foreignness of the structure of
the translation and prefers a naturalising English style in the translation.

You might also like