Riassunto schematico parte in inglese Lingua Inglese 4

Towards contemporary translation theory

Roman Jakobson 1959

Roman Jakobson introduced important concepts in translation studies in 1959, focusing on structuralism and linguistic aspects of translation. He identified three kinds of translation: intralingual, interlingual (translation between two different written systems), and intersemiotic.

Interlingual translation

Interlingual translation, as discussed by Saussure, involves two elements of the langue: specific individual utterances, or parole. The concept of laydown as signifier refers to the general written/spoken sign and specific concept. Jakobson emphasized that it is possible to understand what is implied by a word even if we have never seen or experienced the concept or thing in relationship.

He proposed that equivalence in meaning (parole) does not have a fixed equivalence between code units. This leads to the idea of linguistic universalism, where language, even if it expresses the same meaning or anger/shared notions, operates differently. Linguistic relativity or determinism suggests that differences in languages imply different concepts. For example, the American Hopi language has two words for time, while Eskimos have more words for snow. People from hot climates might notice differences between brush and snow, associating differences with equivalence.

Semantic fields and translation

Jakobson highlighted how translations must convey, not just may convey, the feel of pressure. The concept of possession, such as "la casa" in Italian or "das Haus" in German equating to "the house" in English, illustrates these differences. Additionally, aspects such as Russian verb morphology vary depending on whether an action has been completed, demonstrating the complexity of translation.

Eugene Nida and translation equivalence

Moving forward in contemporary translation theory, Eugene Nida introduced the seminal concepts of formal and dynamic equivalence. His focus was on achieving an equivalent effect in translation.

Peter Newmark and Werner Koller

Peter Newmark further developed the ideas of semantic and communicative translation, while Werner Koller discussed correspondence, equivalence, and function in translation theory.

Structuralism and linguistic universalism

Jakobson's ideas on structuralism and linguistic universalism suggest that while there may be differences in linguistic expressions, there exists a shared way of thinking and experiencing the world. Linguistic determinism emphasizes that language differences lead to different conceptual understandings. For instance, the lack of a word for time in American flags or the numerous words for snow in Eskimo languages highlight these differences.

Cross-linguistic differences emphasize that equivalence varies in what translations must convey, not just what they may convey. This includes the possession of items, such as houses, and the variation in verb morphology to indicate completed actions.

Translation as a science

The science of translation provides translators with principles for discovering source texts and encoding them to rearrange basic structural elements. Recent work in linguistics has focused on moving from surface structures to a theory of universal grammar, heavily relying on grammars and sentences formed by rules.

Transformational grammar

Using transformational grammar, sentences are formed by rules that produce underlying deep structures, which are then transformed to new underlying phrases. For example, actions are derived from phrase exercises in descriptive processes of base transformation. This includes the analysis using sentence transformation grammar and different types of phrase diagrams:

• Verbs → verbs (no auxiliaries)
• Objects → nouns
• Adjectives → quantifiers and qualifiers
• Prepositions → phrases or complex prepositions

NDA and types of equivalence

NDA describes basic orientations and types of equivalence, such as formal and dynamic. The emphasis is no longer on literal, free, or faithful translations, but on the formal equivalence which focuses on the message itself, both in form and content, without borrowing from source languages. It also considers how readers choose to access the true language.