đánh giá chất lượng bản dịch tiếng việt phần 7 cơn ác mộng trong cuốn tiểu thuyết chạng vạng áp dụng mô hình của j. house

From the researcher‘s point of view, J.House‘s model is a good one which can be used to assess literary translation quality, specifically the chapter ―Cơn ác mộng‖ excerpting from the no

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

-***-

LÊ MỸ HẠNH Post-graduate Course: 16

A TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE

VIETNAMESE VERSION OF PART 7 “NIGHTMARE” IN THE

NOVEL “TWILIGHT” USING J.HOUSE’S MODEL

(ĐÁNH GIÁ CHẤT LƯỢNG BẢN DỊCH TIẾNG VIỆT PHẦN 7 “CƠN ÁC

MỘNG” TRONG CUỐN TIỂU THUYẾT “CHẠNG VẠNG”

ÁP DỤNG MÔ HÌNH CỦA J.HOUSE)

MA MINOR THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 15

Hanoi, 2010

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

-***-

LÊ MỸ HẠNH Post-graduate Course: 16

A TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE VIETNAMESE VERSION OF PART 7 “NIGHTMARE” IN THE

NOVEL “TWILIGHT” USING J.HOUSE’S MODEL

(ĐÁNH GIÁ CHẤT LƯỢNG BẢN DỊCH TIẾNG VIỆT PHẦN 7 “CƠN ÁC

MỘNG” TRONG CUỐN TIỂU THUYẾT “CHẠNG VẠNG”

ÁP DỤNG MÔ HÌNH CỦA J.HOUSE)

TABLES OF CONTENTS

Declaration………

Acknowledgment………

Abstract………

List of Abbreviations………

INTRODUCTION 1 Rationale for the study………

2 Scope and objectives of the study ………

3 Research methodology………

4 Organization of the study………

Chapter 1 – LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Translation theory………

1.1.1 What is translation?

1.1.2 Translation procedures, strategies and methods………

1.1.3 Translation equivalence ……… ……

1.1.4 Cultural factor in translation………

1.1.5 Text types………

1.1.6 Two types of translation………

1.2 Literary Translation………

1.2.1 General characteristics of Literary Language………

1.2.2 Problems of literary translation ………

1.3 Views and models for translation quality assessment………

i

ii iii

vi

1

1

1

2

2

3

3

3

3

7

9

10

12

13

13

14

16

Chapter 2 – APPLICATION OF HOUSE’S MODEL FOR

TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT

2.1.Overview of the model ………

2.2 Summary of the original text‘s content ………

2.3 Analysis of the original text based on J House‘s model……

2.3.1 Features of the Source Text in the light of Halliday‘s

functional grammar………

2.3.2 Analysis of Source Text based on House‘s model……

Chapter 3 – DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

3.1 Source Text and Translation Text comparison and statement

INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale for the study

In the process of globalization, English, in Vietnam, becomes more and more important In fact, there are more and more documents need to be translated such as economic contracts, laws, politics, literature, ect Therefore, the need for translation between languages is greater than ever before However, the number of good translators or interpreters, especially in literature such as Duc Hieu, Thai Ba Tan, Thuy Toan, are limited

There is a fact that there have been many literary translations so far such as Harry Porter, The last leaf, Twilight, ect But how much quality of the translations still draws much discussion Thus, it is extremely necessary to evaluate the translations, especially literary translations

Translation theorists have their own founded criteria for translation quality assessment Among them is Julian House, a German linguist, with a model for assessing translation quality From the researcher‘s point of view, J.House‘s model is a good one which can be used to

assess literary translation quality, specifically the chapter ―Cơn ác mộng‖ excerpting from the novel Chạng Vạng by Tinh Thuy (translated from chapter 7 ―Nightmare‖ of the novel Twilight

- a young-adult vampire romance novel written by Stephenie Meyer)

2 Scope and Objectives of the study

 Scope and Objectives:

―Twilight‖ - a wildly popular series for young adults - is a novel consisting of twenty four

chapters However, this study will only focus on analyzing chapter 7 ―Nightmare‖

Accordingly, it aims to analyze ST and TT under House‘s model to discover how much quality of the translation text, find out some problems of literary translation, and put forward some suggestions for this field of translation

When reading the Literature Review it is easy to see that there are different views and models on translation quality assessment (TQA) Among them, yet, J House‘s model which is based on pragmatic theories of Language Use sounds the most proper to be applied in

assessing literary translation, specifically chapter 7 ―Nightmare‖ excerpting from the novel

―Twilight‖

3 Research methodology

 Research Questions

The study aims at finding answers to the two following questions:

- How much is the quality of Translation Text according to House‘s model ?

- What are problems and implications for literary translation?

 Subjects of the study

The subjects of this study are English and Vietnamese literary texts, J House‘s model

on translation quality assessment, M A K Halliday‘s functional grammar

 Research method of the study

Qualitative analysis is employed to study individual texts closely Moreover, since the study is a descriptive-analytical one, descriptive and comparative techniques are used to evaluate the translation text

Specifically, data for this research is collected through the procedure of critical

analyzing The analysis is based on J House‘s model

Under House‘s model, the analysis and comparison of ST and TT are carried out in two sections: Dimensions of Language User and Dimensions of Language Use In Language User, three situational dimensions which refer to the features marking the provenance of a text producer are introduced including Geographical origin, Social class, and Time In Language Use, five situational dimensions such as Medium, Participation, Social relationship, Social attitude, and Province are applied for the analysis and comparison Also, on each of the dimensions, the researcher analyses the texts on three aspects: syntactic, lexical, textual means

4 Organization of the study

The first chapter of the study will be literature review in which some related concepts

of translation theory and some typical models of translation quality assessment are discussed

In the second chapter, the research will introduce an overview of the original text‘s content, and J House‘s model applied to analyze the ST

In order to exemplify and demonstrate this TQA model, in the third chapter, the researcher will apply J House‘s model to analyze and compare English source text and its Vietnamese translation text

CHAPTER 1 – LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter discusses the theoretical background of the study which firstly explores some related concepts, and then some typical models of translation quality assessment

1.1.2 Translation procedures, strategies and methods

As far as we know, translation is not a facial job There is no problem to translate from

a source language to a target language if language is just a classification for a set of general or universal concepts But translation covers not only word for word translation but also many other factors The concepts of one language may differ radically from those of another This is because each language articulates or organizes the word in different way The bigger the gap between the SL and the TL gets, the more difficult the process of transfer will be The difference between the two languages and the difference in cultures makes the process of translating a real challenge Therefore, the translator is required to be thoroughly aware of translation procedures, strategies and methods

Translation methods

Concerning translation methods, there are many different classifications Basing on Peter Newmark‘s classifications, however, there are eight methods in translating which are divided into two main groups called semantic translation and communicative translation They are put in the form of a flattened V diagram as follows:

Faithful translation Idiomatic translation Semantic translation Communicative translation

Source: V diagram of translation method (P.Newmark, 1988:45)

a Word-for-word translation: The source language word is translated into another language by their most common meanings, which can also be out of context at times, especially in idioms and proverbs

b Literal translation: A literal translation is a translation that follows closely the form of the source language It is a case when the grammatical constructions of the source language are translated to their nearest target language but the lexical words are translated singly, out of context (P.Newmark, 1988:46)

c Faithful translation: This translation method means not putting in too much that isn't there; trying to maintain a respectable degree of similarity of tone and form; and hoping that the impression made on the reader in the receiving language resembles as closely as possible the impression made on the reader in the original language In other words, the translation interprets the exact contextual meaning of the original within the constraints of the grammatical structures of the target language

d Semantic translation: According to the definition of semantic translation on website

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_translation, Semantic translation is the process

of using semantic information to aid in the translation of data in one representation to another representation Semantic translation takes advantage of semantics that associate meaning with individual data elements in one dictionary to create an equivalent meaning in a second system Actually, Semantic translation refers to that type of translation which takes into account the aesthetic value of the source language text

e Adaptation: This method refers to a type of translation which is used mainly for plays and poems The text is rewritten considering the source language culture which is converted to the target language culture where the characters, themes, plots are usually preserved

f Free translation: A free translation is a translation that reproduces the general meaning

of the original text It may or may not closely follow the form or organization of the original According to P Newmark, free translation reproduces the matter without the manner, or the content without the form of the original

g Idiomatic translation: : It translates the message of the original text but tends to distort the original meaning at times by preferring colloquialisms and idioms

h Communicative translation: This method displays the exact contextual meaning of the original text in a manner where both content and language are easily acceptable and comprehensible to the readers

Among all above-mentioned translation methods, semantic and communicative translation are the two most common ones which are often used in literary translation by the translator P Newmark stated that a semantic translation is written at the author‘s linguistic level and used for ―expressive‖ texts, a communicative translation at the readership‘s and used for ―informative‖ and ―vocative‖ texts

Translation procedures

Translation is a field of various procedures In addition to word-for-word and for-sense procedures, the translator may use a variety of procedures that differ in importance according to the contextual factors of both the ST and the TT

sense-a Transliteration: This procedure refers to the conversion of foreign letters into the letters of the TL Actually, this operation usually concerns proper names that do not have equivalents in the TLT

b Borrowing: It refers to a case whereby the translator uses a word or an expression from the source text in the target text

c Calque: It refers to the case where the translator imitates in his translation the structure

or manner of expressions of the ST In other words, the translator translates the elements of the expression word for word

d Transposition: This procedure reflects the grammatical change that occurs in translation from SL to TL It, in fact, offers a variety of possibilities to avoid untranslatability Due to this, the translator seems to be more in favor of using it

e Modulation: Modulation is a change in point of view that allows us to express the same phenomenon in a different way It is classified into two types: standard modulation (usually used in bilingual dictionaries) and free modulation (more practical in cases where the target language rejects literal translation)

f Reduction: In reduction procedure, the translator is more likely to reduce in the

number of elements that form the SLT This procedure should respect the principle of relevance, that is, the translator should make sure that no crucial information is dropped in translation

g Expansion: Expansion refers to the case where the translator exceeds the number of

words of the ST in translation Moreover, expansion procedure also occurs when the translator tries to move from the implicit into the explicit

h Adaptation: This procedure is used as an effective way to deal with culturally-bound words/expressions, metaphors and images in translation In other words, the translator bases on to the characteristics of the target language to rewrite the ST

i Paraphrase: It is a procedure whereby the translator replaces a word in the source text

by a group of words or an expression in the target text

j Compensation: In this procedure, the translator solves the problem of aspects of the

source text that cannot take the same form in the target language by replacing these aspects with other elements or forms in the source text

In general, these procedures are used by translators to add information about a culturally-bound word/expression, or a technical term that is related to a specific domain

1.1.3 Translation equivalence

Obviously, translation is the process to transfer written or spoken source language texts

to equivalent written or spoken target language texts In translation theory, therefore, equivalence is regarded as a central concept The domain of equivalents covers linguistic units such as morphemes, words, phrases, clauses, idioms and proverbs Hence, finding equivalents

is the most problematic stage of translation However, it is not meant that the translator should always find one-to-one categorically or structurally equivalent units in the two languages, that

is, sometimes two different linguistic units in different languages carry the same function The translator, after finding out the meaning of an source language linguistic form, should ask himself / herself what the linguistic form is in another language—target language—for the same meaning to be encoded by

From Eugene Nida‘s view point, there are two typical equivalences, namely formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence The first one centers on the form and content of the message of the ST while the later aims at complete naturalness of expression in the TT However, Nida is in more favour of the application of dynamic equivalence This is perfectly understandable if we take into account the context of the situation in which Nida was dealing with the translation phenomenon, that is to say, his translation of the Bible Thus, the product

of the translation process, that is the text in the TL, must have the same impact on the different readers it is addressing

The British translation theorist Peter Newmark, influenced by the work of Nida, feels that the difference between the source language and the target language would always be a major problem He acknowledges that it is necessary to achieve equivalent effect to produce the same effect on the readership of the translation as was obtained on the readership of the original Also, Peter Newmark replaces the terms ―formal equivalence‖ and ―dynamic equivalence‖ with ―semantic translation‖ and ―communicative translation‖, and alters the focus of the translation back to the ST with his support for a literal approach

An extremely interesting discussion of the notion of equivalence can be found in Baker (1992) who seems to offer a more detailed list of conditions upon which the concept of equivalence can be defined She explores equivalence at different levels in relation to the translation process such as grammatical, textual and pragmatic aspects According to Baker, equivalence can appear at word level and above word level, when translating from one language into another In a bottom-up approach to translation, equivalence at word level is the first element to be taken into consideration by the translator In fact, when the translator starts analyzing the ST she/he looks at the words as single units in order to find a direct 'equivalent' term in the TL Concerning grammatical equivalence, Baker claims that different grammatical structures in the SL and TL may cause remarkable changes in the way the information or message is carried across These changes may induce the translator either to add or to omit information in the TT because of the lack of particular grammatical devices in the TL itself With regard to textual equivalence, it refers to the equivalence between a SLT and a TLT in terms of information and cohesion Texture is a very important feature in translation since it provides useful guidelines for the comprehension and analysis of the ST which can help the translator in his or her attempt to produce a cohesive and coherent text for the audience in a specific context It is up to the translator to decide whether or not to maintain the cohesive ties

as well as the coherence of the SLT His or her decision will be guided by three main factors, that is, the target audience, the purpose of the translation and the text type Unlike the two above equivalence, pragmatic equivalence refers to implicatures and strategies of avoidance during the translation process Implicature is not about what is explicitly said but what is implied Therefore, the translator needs to work out implied meanings in translation in order to get the ST message across

More specifically, Werner Koller acknowledges that equivalence may be ―denotative‖,

―connotative‖, ―text-normative‖, ―pragmatic‖, and ―formal‖ These five factors are also the five types of equivalence introduced by W Koller According to the scholar, there are five factors which can be argued to play a relevant role in the specification of equivalence types Firstly, the extralinguistic content transmitted by a text determines denotative equivalence kind Secondly, the connotations factor transmitted by means of the word choice with respect

to level of style (register), the social and geographic dimension, frequency determines connotative equivalence type Thirdly, the text and language norms factor for given text-type specifies the text-normative equivalence which is concerned with text-type specific features

Fourthly, the receiver (reader) to whom the translation is directed in order to achieve an

intended effect determines pragmatic equivalence type (commonly termed as communicative equivalence) Fifthly, the factor of formal-aesthetic features of the source text relates formal equivalence type (which is referred by the literature the expressive equivalence or artistic- aesthetic equivalence)

Another linguist who is also concerned with the notion of equivalence is Juliance House She emphasizes that equivalence is the conceptual basis not only of translation but also

of translation criticism where equivalence is the fundamental criterion of translation quality In

the book Text Translation Computational Processing by Erich Steiner and Colin Yallop in

2001, Juliance House wrote that views of equivalence as simply based on formal, syntactic, and lexical similarities alone are multiply ambiguous Further, purely formal definitions of equivalence have long been revealed as deficient in that they can not explain appropriate use

in communicative performance This is why functional, pragmatic equivalence has been a concept accepted in contrastive linguistics for a long time, and it is this type of equivalence which is most relevant for translation It is consequently used in the functional pragmatic model where it is related to the preservation of ―meaning‖ across two different languages and cultures

1.1.4 Cultural factor in translation

In translation, especially literary translation, there is still a topic that manages to attract

a certain amount of attention from some of translation theory‘s leading scholars It is the cultural factor in translation

With regard to the cultural factor in translation, the researcher attempts to clarify the definition of culture first Culture is a shared system for interpreting reality or system of congruent beliefs, values, strategies and cognitive environments which guide the shared basis

of behaviour What is particularly appropriate in this definition is the use of the word ‗shared‘, since it is precisely the non-shared elements of language and culture that create the need for transfer and translation Culture can be defined as ―the entire setting of norms and conventions

an individual as a member of his society must know in order to be ‗like everybody‘ – or to be different from everybody‖ This definition points to the ―difference‖ which also marks the need for transfer and translation

Julian House, in the book Text Translation Computational Processing by Erich Steiner

and Colin Yallop in 2001, also mentions the concept of a ―cultural filter‖ which is a means of capturing socio-cultural differences in expectation norms and stylistic conventions between source and target linguistic-cultural communities According to the linguist, it is essential to take into account whatever knowledge there is about cultural differences between target and source communities when doing the comparative analysis of source and target texts

In fact, it is not easy to translate from a source language to a target language without any errors Because language has been argued to be arbitrary By arbitrariness it is meant that there is no one-to-one correspondence between the form of the word and the shape of the object to which the word refers (Yule, 1985,18) This is especially true in the case of the abstract words such as advice, meaning, feeling, etc This means that language is based on conventions Also, some theorists have realized that language is not just about structure – it is also about the way language used in a given social context

From all above consideration, it is easy to recognize that there is a close relationship between culture and literary translation Translation is regarded as a means of cultural enrichment and so is literary translation Literary works, rich in cultural elements, are reflections and sublimation of society and life Most people get an understanding other nations through translated texts, of which literary translation has occupied a quite large proportion It can be said that, at the time when a nation witnesses a considerable importation of foreign cultural elements, a vast number of translated texts serve as media, via which foreign ideas and concepts are introduced into the culture of the recipient nation Importation of this kind implants heterogeneous elements into the target culture, enriches its development Furthermore, the target social and cultural system provides sources for the translator and has a certain impact on the literary translation Culture refers to all socially conditioned aspects of human life Translation, literary translation is no exception, is one part of culture and no doubted affected and restrained by other factors of culture As Lefevere remarks that any culture and society is the environment of a literary system and all systems are open to and interact with each other (Lefevere, 1992: 14) Moreover, because these systems are rooted deeply in the target cultural context, the importance of the cultural context is made much account of Hence, a translated work is always made in a certain socio-cultural background and the process of translating is a cultural bound activity Literary translation is no exception,

which is influenced not only by the source culture at one end but also the target culture at the other end

1.1.5 Text types

In order to have a good translation, the translator is required to be a ware of text types With respect to the classification of text types, in Reiss‘s book (1977), the scholar introduces the traditional three text types: Informative, Operative, and Expressive In an informative text it guarantees direct and full access to the conceptual content of the SL text In

an operative text it produces a text-form which will directly elicit the desired response In an expressive text it transmits a direct impression of the artistic form of the conceptual content

Based on cognitive properties, there are five idealized text types or modes (adopted by Hatim and Mason 1990, Albrecht 1995, Biber 1989 -based on linguistic criteria):

- description: differentiation and interrelation of perceptions in space

- narration: differentiation and interrelation of perceptions in time

- exposition: comprehension of general concepts through differentiation by analysis or synthesis

- argumentation: evaluation of relations between concepts through the extraction of similarities, contrasts, and transformations

- instruction: planning of future behaviour

o with option (advertisements, manuals, recipes)

o without option (legislation, contracts) However, from J.House‘s point of view, texts can be divided into two broad functional categories: interpersonal and ideational

IDEATIONAL

Scientific Text Commercial Text Journalistic Article Tourist Information

Booklet

INTERPERSONAL

1.1.6 Two types of translation

House (1977) also discusses about the concept of two translation types: overt translation and covert translation

SOURCE TEXTS

Source culture-specific texts Texts which are not source-culture

having independent status specific, and do not have

independent status

addressees are addressees are addressees are addressees are

non-specific: specified: text non-specific: specified: text

text is not linked to is linked to a text is not linked to is linked to a

a specific historical specific historical a specific historical specific historical

occasion; text is occasion; text is occasion; text is occasion; text is

fictional non-fictional non-fictional non-fictional

Moral Anecdote Political Speech Scientific Text Commercial

Comedy Dialogue Religious Sermon Tourist Information Text

Booklet Journalistic Article

(= second level function in translation) (= function intact in translation)

(Source: J.House, 1977:203)

In an overt translation the TT audience is not directly addressed and there is, therefore,

no need at all to attempt to recreate a second original text since an overt translation must overtly be a translation In overt translation, the work of the translator is important and visible Since it is the translator‘s task to give target culture members access to the original text and its cultural impact on source culture members Also, the translator puts target culture members in

a position to observe and judge this text from outside Thus, the major difficulty in translating overtly is finding linguistic cultural equivalents particularly along the dimension of Tenor and its characterizations of the author‘s temporal, social and geographical provenance

Covert translation, on the other hand, means the production of a text which is functionally equivalent to the ST In this type of translation, the translator have to attempt to recreate an equivalent speech event Consequently, the function of a covert translation is to reproduce in the target text the function that the original has in its frame and discourse world

It is the translator‘s expression task to betray the original and to hide behind the transformation of the original Thus, the work of translator is clearly less visible, if not totally absent

In short, covert translation is less complex and more deceptive than overt translation

In evaluating a translation, it is thus essential that the fundamental differences between overt and covert translation be taken into account These two types of translation clearly make different demands on translation criticism

1.2 Literary Translation

Literary studies have always, explicitly or implicitly, presupposed a certain notion of

―literariness‖ This notion of ―literariness‖ is crucial for the theoretical thinking about literary translation In the following part, the researcher attempts to put forward some general characteristics of literary language and typical problems of literary translation

1.2.1 General characteristics of Literary Language

Literature is the use of well-chosen words to tell a story through narrative, involving characters in conflict, or to express an emotion or idea through artfully arranged images The purpose of literature is to entertain and instruct (or to delight and enlighten) the reader through

the use of the imagination Literature can also shock, amaze, or provide readers with an escape from reality for a while

As far as we know, literary language is a part of general linguistics Thus, almost linguistics features used in literary texts are taken from general linguistics However, literary language possesses some typical characteristics

Literary language possesses all the features that help to realize the descriptive goal of literary texts As Peter Newmark (1995:13) states, there is ―an emphasis linking verbs, adjectives, and adjectival nouns‖ Besides, literary texts consists of the linguistic particularities relating to ―major topics as cohesion, manning patterns, modality and evaluation, the structure of narratives, the recording of character speech and thought, clause possesses and participants, the dynamics of dialogue, presupposition and textual revision‖ (Michael Toolan – 1998)

Literary texts, especially in poetry, also carry the metrical and para-metrical features of language This is an adaptation of the linguistic form which is called the prosodic phonological form A linguistic form which is also used in literary language is parallelism in syntax, semantics, and lexis

In the case of narrative, one of the aspects of narrative form which exists independently of language is the macro-structure, or large-scale structure As far as we know,

it seems generally agreed upon that the structure of stories cannot adequately be accounted for

in terms of their sentence structures alone Notions such as plot, scheme, theme and plan have been used, both in classical literary scholarship and in structural analysis of myths, folktales and other simple stories, in order to denote more global narrative structures

In addition, literary language is closely related to cultural elements These cultural elements marked out the patterns and threads in the narrative whereby the overall cultural gap that has to be bridged can be gauged, and some consideration can also be given to the balance

of items to be domesticated and foreignised Moreover, these elements provide insights to the author and an understanding of the undercurrents in the novel It is, thus, clear that cultural elements are central to any translation To support this idea Nord (1997:11) states that ―….a translation theory cannot draw on a linguistic theory alone… What it needs is a theory of culture to explain the specificity of communicative situations and the relationship between verbalized and non-verbalized situational elements‖

1.2.2 Problems of literary translation

On the way to create a good translation, the translator has to face with a lot of challenges, especially in aspect of literary translation where still exists a lot of problems

The traditional discussion of the problems of literary translation considers finding equivalents not just for lexis, syntax or concepts, but also for features like style, genre, figurative language, historical stylistic dimensions, polyvalence, connotations as well as denotations, cultural items and culture-specific concepts and values The choices made by the translators like the decision whether to retain stylistic features of the source language text or whether to retain the historical stylistic dimension of the original become all the more important in the case of literary translation In the case of translating poetry, it is vital for a translator to decide whether the verse should be translated into verse, or into free verse or into prose In a poetic-aesthetic work of art the usual distinction between form and content (or meaning) no longer holds In poetry, the form of linguistic units can not be changed without a corresponding change in semantic, pragmatic, textual meaning Since the form can not be detached from its meaning, this meaning can not be expressed in another ways such as paraphrases explanations, borrowing of new words are not possible in a translation of a poetic-aesthetic work of art

There is still an argument on the best way to translate literary texts, especially poems within their conceptual framework Some questions relating to this problem has already raised such as: Is the translation possible at all? Should translation be ―literal‘ or ―free‖? Should it emphasize the content or the form? Can a faithful translation be beautiful? The answers to the question range from one extreme to the other and usually end in some sort of a compromise The great writers and translators gave their well-known dictums about translations, which reflected these traditional beliefs about it

One of the most difficult problems in translating literary texts is found in the differences between cultures A translator who uses a cultural approach is simply recognizing that each language contains elements which are derived from its culture that every text is anchored in a specific culture, and that conventions of text production and reception vary from culture to culture In deed, translation is as a form of intercultural communication which raises the problems that are not merely at the verbal level or at the linguistic level The awareness that one does not look for merely verbal equivalents but also for cultural equivalents, if there are any, goes a long way in helping the translator to decide the strategies he or she has to use

Translation then is no longer a problem of merely finding verbal equivalents but also of interpreting a text encoded in one semiotic system with the help of another A literary text would implicate not only other verbal texts but also other modes of signification like food, fashion, local medicinal systems, metaphysical systems, traditional and conventional narratives like myths, literary texts, legends as well as literary conventions like genres, literary devices, and other symbolic structures The whole enterprise of finding cultural equivalents raises awareness of the difference and similarities between the cultures It also brings into focus the important question of cultural identity Clearly, literary translation exerts great influence on the target culture, and at the same time, the target culture has never stopped restraining the process of literary translation It is held that ―there is always a context in which the translation takes place, always a history from which a text emerges and into which a text is transposed.‖ (Lefervere: 1990:11) As a matter of fact, literary translation has never escape from the constraints of a certain target cultural context

1.3 Views and models for translation quality assessment

The assessment of translations does not only have to take into account the ideal case of integral communicative performance, in which the aim in the TL is equivalence as regards the conceptual content, linguistic form and communicative function of a SL text The practice of translation is subject to a great many conditions which determine that such an integral communicative performance can not, or even should not, be achieved Theodore Savory (Readings in translation theories,1957: 49) listed ten translation principles gleaned from the literature, some of which are directly contradictory while others are mutually complementary They provide an impressive picture of the abundance of opinions about what a correct

translation should be like

- A translation must give the words of the original

- A translation must give the ideas of the original

- A translation should read like an original work

- A translation should read like a translation

- A translation should reflect the style of the original

- A translation should possess the style of the translation

- A translation should read as a contemporary of the original

- A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation

- A translation may add to or omit from the original

- A translation may never add to or omit from the original

It is easy to see that none of these principles, taken alone, can be valid for all text translations On the other hand, they could never have arisen and been defended without some support from translation practice

Concerning the assessment of translations, Juliane House has already raised a question: ―How do we know when a translation is good?‖ Responding to this question, from Forster‘s viewpoint (1958:6), a good translation is one which fulfills the same purpose in the new language as the original did, or according to Zilahy (1963:258), a translation is considered good when it arouses in us the same effect as did the original However, determining whether the translation is good or not should be based on a specific model of quality translation assessment In the following part, hence, the researcher introduces some outstanding quality translation assessment models

1.3.1 E A Nida’s response-based approach

Before Nida, most scholars writing about translation applied a particular linguistic approach to the topic, taking translation to be a type of applied linguistics But Nida‘s concern centered on a systematic approach to translation Three criteria suggested by Nida (1964: 182) for assessing quality of a translation are programmatic and general: general efficiency of the communication process; comprehension of intent; equivalence of response The third and most important criterion is, of course, closely to Nida‘s well-known basic principle of ―Dynamic (or Functional) Equivalence of a translation‖; the manner in which receptors of the translation text respond to the translation text must be equivalent to the manner in which the receptors of the source text respond to the source text Nida and Taber (1969:173) suggested three similar criteria: the correctness with which the receptors understand the message of the original, the ease of comprehension and the involvement a person experiences as a result of the adequacy

of the form of the translation Again, these behavioral criteria need to be further explained and put to the practical tests

1.3.2 Koller’s text-based studies

Koller (1974) acknowledges the importance of a linguistic model of translation quality

assessment Three steps for TQA has been introduced by the scholar The first step is to

consider the transferability of the original text If the original text is transferable, we have the most equivalent translation If the original text is untransferable, we have no equivalence or no translation is made The source text should be remained the same The second step is to re-translate the target text into the source language A translation is acceptable if the target text is similar in meaning with the source text after it is re-translated And the third step is to have the translation proof-read by native speakers of the target language A translation must satisfy readers as native speakers of the target language It means they can interpret the translation without difficulties

In general, in spite of presenting stimulating ideas, Koller does not go beyond a very general outline with no suggestions for operationalization Criteria that the transferability of a text based have not been mentioned in his model Moreover, the approach does not provide us with specific ways so that it can be applied to a real translation Thus, it needs to be further developed and made more concrete in order to form a workable model of TQA

1.3.3 Peter Newmark’s comprehensive criticism approach

According to Newmark, translation criticism is an essential component in a translation course He gives three reasons explaining for this idea Firstly, it painlessly improves your competence as a translator Secondly, it expands your knowledge and understanding of your own and foreign language, as well as perhaps of the topic Thirdly, it will help you to sort out your ideas about translation As an academic discipline, translation criticism ought to be the keystone of any course in comparative literature, or literature in translation, and a component

of any professional translation course with the appropriate text-type (eg.: legal, engineering,

ect) as an exercise for criticism and discussion

P Newmark states that any comprehensive criticism should cover five topics to criticize a text:

1 A brief analysis of the SL text stressing its intention and its functional aspects

2 The translator‘s interpretation of the SL text‘s purpose, his translation method and the translation‘s likely readership

3 A selective but representative detailed comparison of the translation with the original

4 An evaluation of the translation: in the translation‘s terms and in the critic‘s terms

5 An assessment of the likely place of the translation in the target language culture or discipline

1.3.4 Juliane House’s functional-pragmatic approach

Juliane House (1977) is in favour of semantic and pragmatic equivalence and argues

that ST and TT should match one another in function The scholar suggests that it is possible

to characterize the function of a text by determining the situational dimensions of the ST In fact, according to her theory, every text is in itself is placed within a particular situation which has to be correctly identified and taken into account by the translator If the ST and the TT differ substantially on situational features, then they are not functionally equivalent, and the translation is not of a high quality In fact, she acknowledges that a translation text should not only match its source text in function, but employ equivalent situational-dimensional means to

achieve that function

Juliane House gives a model for TQA which is based on pragmatic theories of language This model attempts to avoid anecdotalism, reductionism, programmatic statements and intuitively implausible one-sided considerations of the ST and TT alone In this model, there is an analysis of linguistic-situational particularities of the source and target texts, a comparison of the two texts, and an assessment of their relative match The basic requirement for equivalence is that the translation should have a function (consisting of an ideational and

an interpersonal functional component) which is equivalent to that of the original, and should also employ equivalent pragmatic means for achieving that function An initial analysis of the original according to a set of situational dimensions for which linguistic correlates are established will be made Then, there will be a comparison of both the original‘s and the translation‘s textual profiles and functions In this comparison, some mismatches will occur There are two kinds of mismatches: Dimensional mismatches (pragmatic errors that have to do with language users and language use), and Non-dimensional mismatches (in the denotative meanings of original and translation elements and breaches of the target language system at various levels) The final qualitative judgment consists of a listing of both types of errors and

of a statement of the relative match of the two functional components

In short, when having a look at all the four above models, it is clear that the three first models still contains some limitations In Nida and Taber‘s model, all the tests and criteria suggested by these two scholars seem unfruitful This can be explained by the two limitations: the limited goal of establishing ease of comprehension and degree of intelligibility; and the lack of reference to the source text Whereas Koller‘s model appeared to be more proper when

he points to the necessity of developing a comprehensive, linguistic model of translation quality assessment But Koller does not go beyond a very general outline with no suggestions for operationalization And criteria that the transferability of a text based have not been mentioned in his model Concerning P Newmark‘s model, all five topics to criticized a text are clear However, all these five criteria rather lean towards the translator/interpreter‘s experiences only As a result, this model seems to be more proper for the translators/interpreters who have a lot of experiences in translating/interpreting but less knowledge in translation theory For the last model – House‘s model, all criteria in translation quality assessment are specific and adequate with eight situational dimensions In fact, it is a functional- pragmatic model relating to semantic aspect, pragmatic aspect and textual aspect Hence, from the researcher‘s point of view, House‘s model is suitable for linguistic researchers in general, and for this project in particular