Translation problems at textual level

According to K. Reiss, there are two reasons why a translator must be conscious of translation problems at the textual level: firstly, he is supposed to clearly understand the character and type of a text he is going to translate, and, secondly, apply respective criteria for evaluating translation of a particular type of text. It is obvious that criteria of evaluating the quality of translation cannot be the same to apply, for example, to a patent specification and a detective story. Hence it is necessary for a translator to stick to some typology of texts which may guide him in his work.

The attempts to work out typologies of texts based on translation criteria have been made by different authors at various times. A well-known classification of texts suggested by V.Ye.Zuskind contrasts pragmatic and fiction texts on the basis of translation method used: literal in the former and free in the latter (cit. from [Вопросы теории 1978...]). Though this classification is recognized by many scholars today, it is still criticized for a number of reasons:

first, it is doubtful that pragmatic translation which is also known as special translation raises fewer problems than translation of fiction;

second, this classification cannot be described as exhaustive since it is easy to single out numerous types of texts within the two groups, e.g. pragmatic texts can be further classified into legal documents, philosophic studies, shipping documents, etc. The same is true of texts of fiction, as e.g. the translation of an essay and a lyrical poem is supposed to meet different demands.

Third, such subdivisions reveal a variety of texts within the same type that offer dissimilar translation problems on the textual level and call for different evaluative cirteria.

In Russian translation studies one of the most well-known classifications was advanced by prof. A.V. Fedorov who from the point of view of the character of textual material singled out the following three types of texts:

· informative, documentary and scientific texts,

· socio-political texts including feature and front-page articles, speeches, etc.

· literary and fiction texts.

This classification is based on various linguistic criteria, namely: the use of special terminology and phraseology in the first group of texts, the mixture of scientific and literary elements, syntactic peculiarities and other means of creating a rhythmical structure of texts especially in speeches in the secondgroup, and the use of a stylistic variety of lexical and syntactical means and devices in the third group.

O.Kade takes into account several criteria such as the content, form and communicative aim of texts.

In the opinion of K.Reiss the main drawback of various approaches to text classifications is the absence of a single principle in their descriptions. For example, the classification of G. Mounin is based on a number of principles for different types of texts, cf. religious texts are singled out on the basis of their content, translation of fiction is based on the principle of language means used, poems are discussed separately due to their form, children’s literature is regarded as a special type of translation on the basis of their addressee, plays created for stage performances are discussed from the point of view of using a text, etc.

Text-type studies have not been advancing at an equal speed in various spheres of translation work. Most classifications were worked out on the basis of written translation. Typology of texts in simultaneous interpreting was suggested by B. Alexieva who took into account linguistic and non-linguistic features, such as the medium of production ( previously written texts which are either read or simulated as spoken versus texts directly generated in the spoken medium), the functional content, the complementary use of language and non-language, the speaker’s command of the SL, the intertextual relations a single text enters into [Alexieva 1994]

To overcome the weak points of various text classifications K. Reiz classified texts proceeding from the following assumptions:

· it must be a typology of texts relevant for a translator,

· it should not be based on the opposition of mutually exclusive methods of translation to be used for different types of texts, namely literal or free, as both of them can be applied to different types of texts depending on their nature;

· the only criterion that should underlie the typology of texts is that of language and a translator’s task is to analyze the functions of language units in a given type of text;

The author adheres to three basic functions of a language which according to Karl Buhler include descriptive, emotional, appealing to an addressee. On the basis of a prevailing function of a text realized through a proper choice of language means the author suggests a typology of texts including:

1) content oriented texts,

2) form oriented texts,

3) addressee oriented texts,

4) audio-medial texts.

Each type of texts presupposes the choice of the method of translation (free or literal) and determines what should be retained in translation, but it is necessary to single out in each type various kinds of texts which determine what intralanguage regularities should be taken into account in translation.

To content oriented texts she refers such texts in which content is the guiding criterion like news items and news comment, commercial correspondence, specification documentations of goods, user’s manuals, official documents, reports and accounts, specialist texts and the like. In dealing with such texts a translator has to solve the following tasks:

1) to render precisely and fully the informative content of a text which insures invariance of content;

2) to observe formal features and peculiarities of a translation text should conform to the norms of TL because the content which is the most important criterion here should be expressed for the reader in the usual TL form.

Form oriented texts are characterized by a specific form chosen by an author to express a certain content: it may be associated with a particular sound form, syntactic features, phono-stylistic elements, the tempo and rhythm of a text. To such texts the author refers literary prose (essays, literary criticism) and fiction prose (historical anecdotes, novels, short stories) and poetry. Translating form oriented texts a translator must pay attention to the following demands:

1) to retain the aesthetic function of a text and make an appropriate aesthetic impression upon the reader;

2) to employ for this purpose appropriate formal correspondences in TL which should be governed by the peculiarities of SLT form. For example, the English expression ‘ a storm in a teacup’ could be translated into Russian in two ways: «ненужное беспокойство», «излишняя суета» which is used in content oriented texts and «буря в стакане воды» which may be best in form oriented texts.

Addressee oriented texts are always connected with the expression of a certain intent, they have a particular communicative aim to make a desirable extra-linguistic effect on the addressee. The typical examples of such texts are advertisements, prayers, propaganda, satire, etc. A translator of such texts has to meet the following requirements:

· a TL text should exercise upon the reader an effect similar to a SL text;

· in order to achieve this, a translator is allowed a greater liberty both in regard to content and form of a SL text. It is particularly important to take into account the cultural experience of TL speakers and the cultural situations typical of their life experience and accordingly resort to the so-called adaptive translation strategy. Such an adaptation of translation to concrete conditions of the environment of a TL people was described by E.Nida as ‘dynamic equivalence’.

The importance of cultural factors in translation should not undermine the necessity to choose such forms of expression that are considered to be natural in TL for a given situation. The speech motto in English communication which is known as Think positive! makes it necessary to choose respective means of expression, cf. Больше не болейте – Stay well.

Audio-medial texts are characterized by graphic, acoustic and optic forms of expression in addition to language means used in them. Here refer TV and radio messages, commentary, plays, pieces of music, all kinds of performances, etc. The comparison of different kinds of texts shows that there may be peculiarities that must be taken into account when translating them. For example, in a radio report it is necessary to use syntactical structures typical of spoken form of TL. The most common demands of translating audio-medial texts are as follows:

· to provide for a desirable effect upon the TLT listener;

· in order to achieve this, a translator is permitted even greater liberty compared to addressee oriented texts.

To sum up, K. Reiss’s typology of texts may be useful in dealing with different types and kinds of texts, though some of its points seem controversial.