Chapter 5: Textual equivalence

Thematic and information structures.

A certain linear arrangement (the order in which constituents appear in the sentence) is chosen by the speaker in order to express his message in the clearest way according to the context. Over and above its propositional organization, a clause has also an interactional organization which reflects the addresser/addresse relationship. Clause as a message can be analysed in terms of: thematic structure and information structure.

A general overview of the Hallidayan approach to information flow

Thematic structure: theme and rheme A clause consists of two segments. The first one is the THEME. Its what the clause is about and it has 2 functions: a) it acts as a point of orientation by connecting back to previous stretches of discourse. b) it acts as a point of departure by connecting forward and contributing to the development of previous stretches. The second segment is the rheme .Its what the speaker says about the theme. Its the goal of discourse, the most important element of the clause as a message since its the very information that the speaker wants to transmit. The rheme fulfills the communicative purpose of the utterance. Thematic analyses can be represented hierarchically, each clause of every sentence has its own themerheme structure which may be subordinate to a larger theme-rheme structure. Some elements (like conjunctions, disjuncts, connectors) arent part of the thematic structure. Grammaticality vs acceptability The thematic structure can be used to account for acceptability, rather that grammaticality of a sequence. Grammatical sequences are part of the abstract system of language. In context, grammaticality doesnt necessarily ensure acceptability or coherence. The acceptability depends on how a sequence fits in its surrounding textual environment. Text organization and development The theme-rheme distinction can be useful in explaining methods of organization and development in different text types. The themes organizational role is more important than that of the rheme, since it represents the speakers point of departure. The selection of an individual theme is not in itself of particular significance, but the overall choice and ordering of themes plays an important part in organizing a text and providing orientation to the hearer. At this level of analysis a translator faces 2 problems: a) the thematic patterning of the original can be preserved in the target text. Its when the elements in the theme position in the source text can easily and naturally be placed in the same place in the target text. b) the thematic patterning cannot be preserved without distorting the target text. F.i: English has an ego-center pattern whereas some other, such as Arabic (tends to start with a verb, instead of a pronoun). If the thematic patterning cannot be reproduced naturally in the target language, then you will have to abandon it. Translators must not underestimate the cumulative effect of thematic choices: if the themes of most sentences of a paragraph refer to one semantic field, then itll be perceived as the methods of development of the paragraph. In this way, the importance of the positions of elements is seen, since this adds up something 1

that can be understood as a method of development and that can provide a point of orientation for that part of the text. Marked vs unmarked sequences Some choices are more meaningful than others, because they are more marked than others. The more obligatory an element is, the less marked it will be its meaning. For instance, putting a time or place adverbial at the beginning of the clause carries more meaning than putting an adjective in front of a noun because its the result of choice: there are other positions in which it can occur. Another point is the degree of expectedness of a choice. The less expected a choice is, the more marked it is and the more meaning it carries. For instance Beautiful were her eyes. The more marked a choice, the greater for it to be motivated. Conversely, unmarked options are those which are normally selected unless the context motivates the selection of another option from the same system. A given type of clause will therefore have an unmarked thematic structure, variations of which will produce different types of marked themes. In English, an unmarked theme is one that signals the mood of the clause (in interrogative ones is the wh, f.i). A speaker signals his point of departure by indicating if hes making a question, a statement or giving an order. We can talk about local and overall discourse prominence. In marked thematic structures, theme position is associated with local prominence at the level of the clause, while the rheme position is prominent on an overall discourse level, its the very core of the message. Kirkwood suggests that placing an element in initial position will give it a certain prominence, but still it will carry less weight than the rheme. There are 3 functions of marked theme: a. Fronted theme: the achievement of a marked theme by moving into an initial position an element that its otherwise unusual there. Fronting s time/place adjunct. (not highly marked). In China the book was very popular. Fronting an object/complement. (more marked). Well publicized the book was. Fronting of predicator (the most marked thematic choice in English, common in Arabic). b. Predicated theme: it involves using an it-structure (Cleft structure) to place an element near the beginning of a clause and to be interpreted as its theme., as in It was the book that received a great deal of publicity. The theme in these structures is what comes after the verb to be and imply contrast and signal the information structure by presenting the element following be in the main clause as the important element. c. Identifying theme: instead of using it (a cleft structure)an identifying element in theme position by turning it into a nominalization using a wh (pseudo-cleft structure), as it What the book received was a great deal of publicity. The difference with predicated themes is that in them, the thematic element is presented as new information and in identifying themes, as known information. Predicated and identifying themes are both marked, but fairly common in English because they offer a thematization strategy that overcomes restrictions on word order. They are more frequent in written language, since in spoken language stress is mainly used. These structures must be handled carefully in translation because theyre far more marked in language with relatively free word order. Apart from being aware of the level of markedness of a structure in the target and source language, a translator has to know the thematization elements available.

Other types of marked themes are: preposed and postposed themes. They involve using a gloss tag at the beginning or at the end of the clause respectively. The filter, he sent the documents. He sent the documents, the filter. Hallidayan position For him, theme is the first position of the clause and rheme is whatever comes after if. So, there is no possibility for a rheme-theme structure, differently from the Prague School considerations. Its a simple method to apply but, as bad points, its partial circular and fails to relate descriptions of SVO languages with relatively free word order. If theme is whatever comes first, we have to acknowledge that different languages prefer to thematize different constituents. But Halliday doesnt attempt to address these preferences. Theme and Chinese-style topic Chinese is a topic-prominent language. Unlike subject-prominent languages such as English, they appear to have double subjects. Ej: Fish, red snapper is delicious. (Japanese). The topic of a clause in topic-prominent languages always occurs in initial position, so they are presumably the same as themes. However, the scope of a topic isnt restricted to the clause. Thats why when a topic is announced, the subjects of subsequent clauses can be omitted. Also, unlike subject, the can only be definite.

Information structures: given and new

The theme-rheme distinction is speaker oriented(he decides what is his starting point) and new-given information distinction is hearer oriented (what is new or common ground for the hearer). The normal, unmarked order is to place the new element before the new one. Besides, the same principles that motivates to place given before new information, also motivates them to place longer and heavier structures at the end of the clause: end- weight principle. Translation problems arise when a principle like this seems to clash with more basic principles, such as the SV order in the target language. EJ: Fueron estudiadas las causas vs. the causes were studied. Signaling new and given For H&H information structure is a feature of spoken discourse and the information unit is, strictly speaking, not the clause (grammatical unit) but the tone group (phonological unit). This unit has the peak of prominence or tonic accent on the new element. The element where the stress falls carries the information focus. Ej: /I havent seen you for ages/. The information to decide whether an element is given or new is provided by the context. Besides, some grammatical features give clues to decide. F. i., the definite or indefinite articles signal if an element has been previously introduced. Similarly, given info tends to be subordinate to other info. Some items are inherently given because of their meaning, thats the case of pronouns. Since stress isnt available in written discourse, intricate syntactic devices are used for a similar function. F. I., cleft and pseudo cleft sentences signal new and given info. The item in theme position is new and the one in the rheme position, given. Although unavailable in written language, stress is often implicit in certain structures that involve emphasis: Do is stressed when used for emphasis (I DID go.), repetition of the auxiliary-particularly if it can be replaced by a 3

contracted form- (Im going vs. I am going), punctuation (use of comma) in defining and non defining relative clauses. Languages use different strategies to signal information structure and translators must be aware of the different signaling systems. In some language stress isnt available, in others the article system doesnt even exist. Determination of giveness Commonly, an element is treated as given when its recoverable from the context or cotext. But info may be treated as given or new for different reasons. Chafe suggests that givenness is that knowledge that the speakers assumes to be in the addresses consciousness. The time that an element remains in his consciousness is determined by 1)the number of intervening sentences in which the item wasnt mentioned and 2)the change of scene, when new elements enter the mind and push the old ones. Rhetorical reasons play also a role in givenness. Presenting a piece of info as given implies to create a common ground and consider it non-negotiable, conversely, presenting an old element as new indicates unexpectedness or contrast. Marked information structure and marked rheme Not only the theme, but also the rheme can be marked to provide communicate force to some utterances. A marked theme gives prominence to an element as linking information, whereas marked rheme gives prominence to an element as the core of the message. In order to highlight the rheme, the theme may be elided or punctuation may be use for the same end (use of full stops in unexpected places to force the reader to consider certain units as units of information).

The Prague school position on information flow: functional sentence perspective (FSP)
It considers that the communicative goals of an interaction cause the structure of a clause or sentence to function in different communicative settings. The theme/rheme distinction is replaced by the Communicative dynamism (CD). Based on the idea that linguistic communication is dynamic, not static, CD is a property displayed on the course of information to be developed and consists in advancing. The degree of CD of a unit is the extent to which it contributes to the communicative development. Its suggested that theme consists of content dependent items and rheme of content independent ones, so the former has a low CD degree, since they dont push the communication much forward and can be thematic or rhematic. The former are always thematic. Then, Fibras explains that the non-theme consists of: the transition and the rheme. The former consists of elements that link the foundation-laying and the core-constituting parts of the clause. It generally consists of the temporal & modal exponents of the verb and carry the lowest degree of CD and are the transition proper. The rheme carries the highest degree of CD and consists of the notional components of the verb and the rest of the message. A clause may totally consist of context-independent elements and, in this case, the theme will be the element with the lowest degree of CD and the rheme, the one of the highest degree of CD. 4

Linear arrangement and thematic status in FSP Communicative Dynamism is assumed to be achieved by the interplay of linear modification (syntax), semantic structure and context. Translating between languages with different properties and different types of syntactic restrictions necessarily involves a great deal of skewing. Some strategies to minimize the tension between syntactic and communicative functions are: 1. Voice change: changing the verbs syntactic form to achieve a different sequence of elements. 2. Change of verb: replacing the verb with one that has a similar meaning but can be used in different syntactic configurations. 3. Nominalization: replacing a verbal form with a nominal one. 4. Extraposition: involves changing the position of the entire clause in the sentence. F. I, the cleft and pseudo cleft structure.

Chapter 6: textual equivalence:cohesion

Cohesion is the network of lexical, grammatical and other relations that provide links between various parts of a text. Cohesion is a surface relation; it connects the actual words or expressions. H&H identify five main cohesive devices in English: Reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction & lexical cohesion. Reference Its the relationship between a word and what it points to in the real world. But, for H&H reference denotes a direct relationship between linguistic expressions. The most common reference items are pronouns. So, reference is a device that allows the reader to trace participants, entities, etc. in a text. Another type of reference is co-reference: it consists of a chain of co-referential items. F. i: Margaret Tatcher> The Iron Lady>The Prime Minister> Margaret. Theres a continuum from full repetition of the scale to pronominal reference: Repetition >Synonym> Superordinate> General word> Pronominal reference E.g: the boy is crying. The boys sad>the child>idiot>he Patterns of reference (anaphoras) vary across and within languages (text types are an important factor in determining the choice of pattern). Each language has certain preferences for certain patterns of reference as well as specific preferences sensitive to text types. Some languages, such as Chinese, hardly use pronouns. Participants are introduced once and omitted onwards. Substitution & ellipsis They re grammatical relationships. In substitution, one item is replaced by another. E.g: I like movies. So do I. Ellipsis involves the omission of an item. Something is left unsaid & its however understood. Note that the boundaries between ellipsis, reference & substitution arent clear cut.

Translators need to be aware that there are different devices in different languages for creating textures and that texts hold together by virtue of semantic & semantical relationships between their elements. Every language has its own battery of devices for creating links between textual elements. Conjunction It involves the use of formal markers to relate clauses, sentences or paragraph to each other. Conjunctions signal the way the writer want the reader what is about to be said to what has been said before. There are 5 main relations: Additive (and, besides) Adversative (but, instead) Causal (so, because) Temporal (then, in conclusion) Continuatives (well, surely, afterall)

The same conjunction may be used to signal different relations, depending on the context. These relations can be expressed in a variety of ways; the use of a conjunction isnt the only mean to express a temporal or causal relation. E. g: the verb follow expresses a temporal relation. Conjunctive relations dont reflect between external phenomena only, but they may also be set up to reflect relations internal to the text or communicative situation. E. g: temporal relations arent restricted to real time-sequences; they may reflect stages in the unfolding text. Theres some uncertainty as to whether conjunctions within a sentence can be considered cohesive. For instance, H&H dont consider cohesive after in this sentence: After they had fought in the battle, it snowed. Languages vary tremendously in the type of conjunction they prefer and the frequency with which they use such items. Also, since conjunction is a device for signaling relations between chunks of information, its naturally related to how much to say in a go and to how the relations between chunks are perceived and signaled. In fact, conjunction provides an insight into the whole discourses logic. Some languages, such as German, tend to express relations through subordination and complex structures. Others, such as Chinese, prefer simpler and shorter structures. Whether a translation conforms to the source text cohesion pattern or tries to approximate to target language patterns will depend in the final analysis on the purpose of the translation and the amount of freedom the translator feels entitled to rechunk information or altering signals of relations between chunks. Any choice will have its advantages and disadvantages. Following source language norms may involve minimal changes in overall meaning. On the other hand, noticeable deviation from typical target language patterns of chunking information and signaling relations is likely to result in the sort of text that can be easily identified as a translation because it sound foreign. Lexical cohesion It refers to the role played by the selection of vocabulary in organizing relations within a text. A given lexical item cannot be said to have a cohesive function per se, but any lexical item can enter into a cohesive relation with other items in a text. Lexical cohesion covers any instance in which the use of a lexical item recalls the sense of an earlier one.

H&H divide lexical cohesion into two main categories: collocation &reiteration. The latter involves the repetition of a lexical item. A reiterated item may be a repetition of an earlier item, a synonym or near synonym, a super ordinate or a general word. Difference with reference: In the sentences: the lads acting so stupid. Boys can be so silly. Boys is a repetition, but boys and the lad havent the same referent. Collocation covers any instance which involves a pair of lexical items that are associated with each other in the language. There are different types of association that H&H give as examples: Association by oppositeness. (love/hate) Association between words of the same ordered series. (Monday/Friday) Association between words of unordered series. These can be part-whole relations (body/arm) or part-part relations (mouth/eye) or co-hyponym (red/green) Association based on a history of co-occurrence (rain, pouring, torrential) Cohesion is also achieved by a variety of devices other than those mentioned by H&H and discussed above. These include continuity of tense, consistency of style, punctuation, etc. so, it should be noticed that unmotivated shifts of style, a common pitfall in translation, can seriously disrupt a texts cohesion and coherence.

Chapter 7: Pragmatic equivalence

Pragmatics is the study of language in use. Its the study of meaning, not as generated by the language system, but as conveyed and manipulated by participants in a communicative situation. The areas to be explored here are: coherence and implicature.

Coherence
Coherence vs. cohesion Cohesion is the network of surface relations which links words and expressions to other words and expressions to other words and expressions in a text, and coherence is the underlying network of conceptual relations in a text. By Cohesion, stretches of language are connected to each other by lexical and grammatical dependencies. By coherence, they are connected by virtue of conceptual or meaning dependences as perceived by language users. Cohesion is the surface expression of coherence relations, its a device for making conceptual relations explicit. For instance, therefore may express a notion of consequence. However, the mere presence of cohesive markers cannot create a coherent text; cohesive markers have to reflect conceptual relations that make sense. The ability to make sense of a stretch of language depends on the addressees expectations and experience of the world. Different individuals have different experiences of the worlds and different views on the way events and situations are organized or related to each other. A network of relation which is valid and makes sense in one society may not be valid in another.

The texts coherence is result of the text interaction between the knowledge presented in the text and the readers own knowledge and experiences of the world. A readers cultural and intellectual background determines how much sense he gets out of a text. As far as translation is concerned, this means that the range & type of difficulties encountered wont so much depend on the source text itself as on the significance of the translated text for its readers as members of a certain community. A translator has to be conscious of the language available to his target readers and of the expectations they are likely to have about organization of the world and language, conventions of particular text types, the structure of social relations, the appropriateness of different linguistic and non linguistic behaviours. Coherence and process of interpretation: implicature Supplemental coherence: We naturally provide the necessary links to render a discourse coherent Explanatory coherence: when we not only establish continuity of senses, but also justify it. According to Grice, an implicature to refer to what the speaker means or implies, rather to what he literally says. E.g: A: Shall we go for a walk? B: its raining. Grice suggests that speakers can signal an implied meaning conventionally or non-conventionally. Conventionally implies the use of textual resources which are conventionally understood to signal certain relationships between propositions, grammatical structure is another source. Implied meaning which isnt conventionally signaled derives from the cooperative principle and the maxims associated with it: Cooperative Principle: make your contribution such as required, at the stage in which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. Quantity: make your contribution as informative as required. Quality: dont say what you believe to be false. Relevance: be relevant Manner: be perspicuous, specifically: avoid obscurity of expression, be clear, be orderly, avoid ambiguity. We can observe or flout the maxims and we assume that the participants operate the CP and particularly the maxim of relevance. Therefore, well try to find an interpretation that connects the utterances. Well attribute relevance to what we read, even when it appears to be unrelated. One a maxim is flouted, the speaker produces a conversational implicature. E.g: if the utterance do you know what time is it? is used as a genuine question has a certain meaning, but if its put into context with a certain intonation can mean something different, for instance youre very late. CI are a difficult topic since CI are often undetermined and since an utterance can be, intentionally or not intentionally, open to several possible interpretations. This complicates the role of the translator, who may eliminate, knowingly or not, certain possible interpretations of the original from the target text. both situations can arise from the constrains imposed on the translator by the structure of the target language, the nature of the target audience & the conventions of the target culture. 8

Grice details many factors that contribute to our success/failure in working out implicatures: 1. Conventional meaning of words and structures. Knowledge of the language system is essential. Any mistranslation of words and structures in the source text may well affect the calculability of implicatures in the target text. As well as the conventional meaning of words, each language also has conventional associations between certain linguistic patterns and certain inferable meanings. E.g: how can you be so cruel? (Instead of: youre so cruel), isnt she cute? (shes so cute). Rhetorical questions, such as havent you done well? are often ironic. Likewise, correct me if Im wrong suggests I know Im right. Besides, typographic features also convey implicatures, for instance the use of inverted commas in English. Problems arise in translation when the function of such patterns isnt recognized and a literal transfer of forms distorts the original implicature or conveys a different one. 2. The identity of any reference that may be involved. The ability to identify references to participants and entities is essential for drawing inferences and maintaining the coherence of a text. A proper name or a reference to a type of food unknown to the target reader can disrupt the continuity of the text and obscure the relevance of any statement associated with it. the ability to interpret the significance of a reference and the way it links with other features of the context and cotext contributes to the continuity of coherence and enables to draw any intended implicature. 3. The co-operative principle and its maxims. Grice suggests that CP & its maxims are universal (applies to linguistic and non linguistic behaviour). However there is evidence to the contrary. Even within the same community, there are sometimes special contexts in which some maxims dont apply. For instance, the maxim of quantity is usually in abeyance in court questioning. Grice suggests that the list of maxims isnt exhaustive and suggests other maxims, such as politeness. In some cultures, politeness even seems to override other maxims. Politeness is a relativistic notion and different cultures have different norms of polite behaviour. They also have different ideas about what is and what is no taboo. In some translation context being polite can be far more important than being accurate. (Arabic texts, for instance) To the idea of universal, a more plausible suggestion would be that all discourse is essentially cooperative and that the phenomenon of implicature (rather than the specific maxims) is universal. The interpretation of the maxims may differ from one linguistic community to another, but the process of conveying intended meaning by exploiting any maxims will be the same. 4. The context, linguistic or otherwise, of the utterance. The context in which an utterance occurs determines the range of implicatures that may sensibly derive from it. Apart from the actual setting and the participants involved in an exchange, the context also includes the co-text and the linguistic conventions of a community in general. The context also includes certain strategies that people regularly employ to impose some kind of structure on the world around them. When a person describes something, recounts an event, etc., hell normally follow a preferred sequence rather than a random one. Temporal order may be universal, but there are other types of preferences for ordering strategies that tend to 9

be language and cultural specific (For instance in the case of the order of addresses). Any deviation from this normal order would encourage the reader to search for some implicature. Another point is the consideration of what is socially and textually appropriate. This is not so much related to what the reader thinks the world is like, but rather with what hes prepared to accept as an appropriate situation in a given context. Another area in which a translator needs to be particularly sensitive to the readers expectations in a given context concerns the modes of address. It includes the appropriate use of personal and occupational titles, surnames, first names, nicknames. Sometimes, modes of address can be used to convey an implicature. But, not always and generally, translators often make adjustments in this area to conform to the readers expectations. 5. Other items of background knowledge. Text presented information can only make sense if related to another information previously given. A text may confirm, contradict, modify or extend what we know about the world. Whether to explain or not a reference depends on whether the target reader is assumed to be familiar with it and the extend to which the translator wants to intervene. The translator should do any research to access the background knowledge, so as not to be hampered by his lack of knowledge on certain matters. In translation, as in any communication, a text doesnt necessarily have to conform to its readerships expectations. Readers version of reality expectations and preferences can be challenged without affecting the texts coherence, provided the challenge is motivated and the reader is prepared for it. 6. The availability of all relevant items falling under the previous headings. In order to imply an implicature, the addressor must be able to assume that the addressee has access to all the necessary background information, features of the context, etc, and that its well within his competence to work out any intended implicature. The less the translator assumes the reader has access to, the more hell explain. Apart from this, we should mention the expectations that the reader will have. For instance, those related to the organization of the language. Any disturbance to the normal organizational patterns language must be motivated (they have to occur in a context that is interpretable by the reader, in a context that yield that interpretation), otherwise the reader will be unable to make sense of it, because they may block the participants access to the conventional meaning of an expression.

10

11