CHAPTER ONE.

AN INTRODUCTION TO TRANSLATION

In this chapter, I will introduce the concept of translation, defining it and highlighting and
the essential supporting structures of idioms. In the first part, it will be presented and
clarified the term ‘translation’ and its characteristics. A detailed interpretation will be given
of the association that is between translation and language teaching. The importance of
translation studies will be illustrated by from different points of view. Throughout the sub-
chapter named ‘The methods of translation’, different types of translation techniques will
be made plain. In the last part of this chapter, which includes the definition, difficulties and
strategies of idioms and fixed expressions, will provide in all these sections examples, in
order to make easier the comprehension of the structures.

1.1 What is translation?

The term translation has various meanings and surrounds encompasses specific aspects. It
is present between different varieties of the same language and even in less accustomed
languages, such as morseMorse code, braille and sign language (gesture based
communication). According to The Concise Oxford English Dictionary (YEAR),
translation is ‘1. the act or an instance of translating. 2. a written or spoken expression of
the meaning of a word, speech, book, etc. in another language.’

Example 1.1

translation n. 1. the act or an instance of translating. 2. a written or spoken expression of

the meaning of a word, speech, book, etc. in another language. (The Concise Oxford
English Dictionary)
The first explanation definition associates withtreats translation as a process, while the
second to theas a product. The first explanation pays particular attention ‘onto ‘the role of
the translator in taking the original or source text (ST) and turning it into a text in another
language (the target text, TT).’ (Hatim & and Munday, 2004:3) The second explanation
definition focuses on the specific translation product made by the translator. The general
subject field, the process (also known as the act of creating/manufacturing the translation)
or the product (the translated text), they all make reference tofall under the umbrella of
translation. The translator is demanded Iin the process of translation between two opposed
different written languages the translator has to change ‘an original written text (the source
text or ST) in the original verbal language (the source language or SL) into a written text
(the target text or TT) in a different verbal language (the target language or TL).’ (Munday,
2001/2008:5). This type has a close similarity tois also called ‘interlingual translation’,
according to the classification put forward . At the same time, in the seminal paper called
‘On linguistic aspects of translation’, it matches to one of the three categories of translation
illustrated by the Russo-American structuralist Roman Jakobson, which includes three. The
categories are as described below:

‘(1) Intralingual translation, or ‘rewording’: ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of

other signs of the same language’;

(2) Interlingual translation, or ‘translation proper’: ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by

means of some other language’;

(3) Intersemiotic translation, or ‘transmutation’: ‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means

of signs of non-verbal sign systems’. (Jakobson, 1959/2004:139)

For instance, when we put in other words an expression or when we give a brief statement
of the main points of a written work or rewrite a text in the same language, intralingual
translation would takes place. If a written work is translated into film, music or painting,
thean intersemiotic translation would come to passoccurs. Between two opposed different
verbal languages there is interlingual translation.

Translation is a modest, but fast-growing industry. At the same time, it is fact-based and
deals with ethical veracity. The more significant a written work’s language is, the more
precisely it needs to be translated. As Newmark (1991) states, this applies to every line of
the text, ‘the text itself; the chapter; the paragraph; the sentence; the clause; the group, the
collocation that lexically cuts across the group; the word; the morpheme, the punctuation
mark. Other linguistic units such as proverbs, metaphors, proper names, institutional terms,
familiar alternatives, eponyms may be found at one or more of these ranks.’ (Newmark,
1991:1). The section in any line of the written text can bemay not as significant as a
specific word. Occasionally, a word can mean more and be the key of the text itself. The
sound (alliteration) or the phonoestethic effect (rhythm) must be provided or balanced, if
they are of main significance. The less the language of a text or any section of text in any
line is essential, the less accurate it needs to be translated. As a consequence, it can be
restored rendered by the suitable normal social language. The better a section of the text is
written, the more precise it should be translated. No matter how important it is, the
intended purpose is the same between for author and translator;, as well as an alike
readership. T the elements and shades are ought to be accurately translated, if they are
plainly communicated. They may just as well be paraphrased. Even though it is not every
fundamental, it seems that there is no valid cause to produce a copy of the truth.

The author identifies two different types of translation, i.e. semantic and communicative:

‘The vast majority of texts require communicative rather than semantic translation. Most
non-literary writing, journalism, informative articles and books, textbooks, reports,
scientific and technological writing, non-personal correspondence, propaganda, publicity,
public notices, standardised writing, popular fiction, the run-of-the-mill texts which have
to be translated today but were not translated and in most cases did not exist a hundred
years agocomprise typical material suitable for communicative translation. On the other
hand, original expression (where the specific language of the speaker or writer is as
important as the content), whether it is philosophical, religious, political, scientific, legal,
technical or literary, needs to be translated semantically. A communicative translation may
well be a useful introduction, a simplified version, to the semantic translation of such
texts.’ (Newmark, 1991:10) (emphasis added)

To sum up the writer’s statement, iI In most of the cases, semantic translation is not needed
as much as communicative translation, but it is important that original expressions are
translated semantically. A cCommunicative translation is most likely an understandable
preface to the semantic translation of the kinds of texts mentioned above. In his publication
‘About translation’, Newmark (1991) states the following:
‘The fact that translation has expanded on so many levels (practitioners, languages,
subject-matter covered, organisation of the activity, quantity of translations)further, the
fact that it is so various, complex and infuriating in one instance, simple and boring in
another all human life is there suggests the need for some kind of frame of reference, some
checklist guidelines to assist translators by categorizing their problems with texts,
paragraphs, sentences, clauses, groups, collocations and words (not to mention
metaphors, eponyms, proper names, cultural and institutional terms, punctuation marks)
by relating criteria to procedures, by recommending solutions.’ (Newmark, 1991:38)
(emphasis added)

According to his argument, Newmark proves usargues that in time the process of
translation has increased on to many phases. This procedure being diverse and compound,
it has made the translator’s job a tough one. Translators need to support their particular set
of principles, ideas, beliefs or assumptions, to determine how the translation process will
be approached, perceived or understood by others. AtIn this stage, assistance is welcomed
in improving the translation of different kinds of written texts. Is unavoidable and natural
‘the difficulties of defining not only translation as an activity but a good translation as a
product, of suggesting a process of translation as well as criteria for translation criticism,
the rise of this discipline, which derives from stylistics, literary criticism and cultural
studies as well as linguistics. In a few words, this utterance proves us that is tough to
explain the activity and product of translation.

Newmark (1991:38) claims that a set of agreed concepts is needed. In most cases a few are
relevant, while in others the relationship ‘between one language and another’ is proper in
the given circumstances. (Newmark 1991:38) On all occasions they are built on solid
examples at each of the stages ‘from the text to the word.’ (Newmark, 1991:38). It Iis not
an easy task to describe the translation as ‘being at once a science and an art, a skill and a
taste, an exercise of choices and decisions. The definition of a good translation is equally
problematic.’ (Newmark, 1991:38). Undoubtedly, the intended meaning can be perceived
differently by every person. In my opinion, I believe that a translation has the required
qualities if it is correctly and carefully written. For Newmark (1991:39), ‘a poor translation
appears in verbal inaccuracy where improper words are put in improper places; that is the
touchstone of a poor translation.’. (Newmark 1991:39) Briefly, when it does no’t meet the
requirements and in most cases the inappropriate words are placed in unsuitable locations
in the written text, then we call this process a translation that is below standard. By all
means, in a text it is not so difficult to reveal mistakes and improperness, than to discover
properness and correctness.

1.1.1 Translation and Language Teaching

‘There is now fair agreement that psychologically, socially, culturally, and indeed
politically, as prestige value, the first aim in nonspecialist and general language learning is
competence in the spoken language, even though reading the foreign language and
translating it for one's colleagues and friends is professionally and personally often more
useful. Since language learning (like translation) is beset with opposing forces and
arguments, the place of translation in achieving this aim, i.e. understanding and producing
speech, is never going to be settled. In the earliest stage it can have only a subsidiary role;
translation into the foreign language of any difficult text, the 'prose', is likely to inhibit
progressive and graded learning, skipping essential steps, and be time consuming.
Translating into the home language will be useful only for purposes of communication
whether the texts are easy or difficult. What remains is translation, either of words,
sentences or brief texts, from the home to the foreign language as a form of control and to
some extent of consolidation, as the quickest and most efficient and objective method of
testing the grammar and the vocabulary that should already be known. Since in language
nothing is actively known that cannot be produced spontaneously and automatically, such a
test, which should be time-limited, is an appropriate complement to a regular oral test.’
(Newmark 1991:50/51) To sum up the writer’s statement, in unspecialized and general
language learning, the first goal is the potential to do something successfully or efficiently
in the spoken language. From my perspective, in order to understand a text, both general
and close reading in required. On one hand, general reading is important, because we need
to perceive the intended meaning of a speech or text. On the other hand, in any demanding
text, the close reading of the words outside and inside the text is essential. Anyhow, in
many cases after reading a foreign language text, the process of translation is easier and
more convenient. In this way, the person who needs the translation will be able to
understand more precisely the text. Considering the fact that learning a new language is not
an easy task to achieve, translation can not always be helpful. In the starting point it can
have just a minor importance. The process of translation will be used for a practical
purpose only in communication.
1.1.2 What is tTranslation studies?

In the course of time, written and spoken translations have assumed a vital job in
interhuman communication. They make accessible important written works for scholarship
and religious intentions. However, Oonly in the previous sixty years has truly started the
study of translation has truly started to be treated as an academic subject. This discipline is
currently referred to as ‘translation studies’ in the English-speaking world, due to the
Dutch-based USA scholar James S. Holmes (SOURCE).

There are two exceptionally observable manners by which translation studies has turned
out to be more important (SOURCE). In the first place, there has been a rapid increase of
specialized translating and interpreting courses at each undergraduate and postgraduate
level. A large number of understudies are fascinated by these courses, which are for the
most part situated towards preparing future professional commercial translators and
interpreters. At the same time, they provide services as respected/worshiped entry-level
qualifications for the translating and interpreting career. There were recorded by Caminade
and Pym (1995) not less than 250 university-level bodies in more than sixty nations
providing four-year undergraduate degrees and/or postgraduate courses in translation. The
number has kept on increasing. Over the last two decades, in numerous languages have
been distributed books and journals on translation. According to Munday (2001/2008:7),
there are plenty ‘of ‘other single-language, modern languages, applied linguistics,
comparative literature and other journals whose primary focus may not be translation but
where articles on translation are often published.’ For instance Continuum, John
Benjamins, Multilingual Matters, Rodopi, Routledge and St Jerome are all independent
European publishing houses. In the area of translation studies they have now a significant
amount of books. In conclusion, we can say that the study of translation is an academic
research field, that has grown dynamically over the past few years.

As Munday (2001/2008:17) points out, in the earlier times, translation has been
deliberatedwas viewed as part of a ‘language-learning’ approach, ‘as part of comparative
literature, translation “workshops” and contrastive linguistics courses.’ It goes without
saying that tThis field’s development is also due to the hard labour that James S. Holmes
has done throughout the years, because he . In his written work, ‘The name and nature of
translation studies’, he intended came up with ‘both a name and structure for the field.’
(Munday, 2001/2008:17).

1.2 3 Translation methods

The process of translating, either literally or freely, has been consistently the main issue of
in translation. According to Newmark (1988:45), ‘many writers favoured some kind of
Tree1 free translation: the spirit, not the letter; the sense not the words; the message rather
than the form: the matter not the manner.’ This is a short, striking and at the same time
memorable phrase used by writers. They wished that the truth will be interpreted and
perceived in the intended meaning. I personally suppose, that the process of translation is
seen in varied ways by each individual. In certain many cases, the writer’s perspective
separates from a specific course and goes in a different direction than ours. In the early
times, a large number of written works were officially prohibited. In the 19 th century, the
translation became established, ‘when the study of cultural anthropology suggested that the
linguistic barriers were’ impossible to overcome ‘and that language was entirely the
product of culture.’ (Newmark, 1988:45). The previously mentioned sight brought a
triumphant conclusion in the declaration of the literalists, Walter Benjamin and Vladimir
Nabokov. As Newmark the writer states (1988:45) states, the quarrel ‘was theoretical: the
purpose of the translation, the nature of the readership, the type of text’ were not talked
through. At the moment, the context has been through modification, but the fundamental
issue stays:. Eevery translation has to be precise. They also have to be composed carefully
and pleasantly.

Newmark discusses several methods of translation, including ENUMERATI-LE.

1.2.1 The methods of translation

Word-for-word translation (Literal translation)

Frequently, word-for-word translation or literal translation is confirmed to be an

‘interlinear translation.’ (Newmark, 1988:45). Interlinear translation is a set of short
descriptions, such as definitions or pronunciations. They are positioned among the lines of
the original text with their translation into a different language. The SL words are instantly
above the TL. The SL word-order is maintained in its original state. On one hand, the
purpose of word-for-word translation, is to perceive the technique of the source language.
On the other hand, it is to interpret a tough written text before the process of translation.
The word-for-word translation is the one and only proper technique in the translation
process which guarantees results, as long as the corresponding word is given both in the
semantic and in the communicative translation. In any kind of translation there is no need
of non-essential words that mean precisely or almost the same as another word.
Explanations or exquisite varieties are as well irrelevant. Nevertheless, in various world
languages, there is a large number of Greek and Latin morphemes in several thousands of
words. These words are easily translatable, ‘either as TL morphemes (i.e. one-to-one
translations) or as words, groups or clauses.’ (Newmark 1991:67). Without exception, in a
language the particular specialized words or phrases used to describe or express a concept
have to be translated by one and the same word in the second language. In my point of
view, it’s misfortune that inside an equivalent pragmatic and denotative circumstance the
ordinary items, occasions and characteristics are not as frequently translated by one and the
same word in the second language. This process would give support or help at perceiving
the main points of translation. Theoretically, in each situation a specific SL word is hardly
ever translated by one and the same word. In most cases, the lexical elements have the
most essential explanation, that are unlikely to be extended over specific boundaries.

Literal translation

A literal translation changes the form of the SL grammatical constituents to their closest
TL equivalents and, at the same time, maintains the sense of the words in its original state,
but repositions them in order that they suit the structure of their new language (Newmark,
1991:PAGE). In the process of literally translation ethnic words are translated.

Faithful translation

A faithful translation tries to make an exact likeness of the accurate contextual

significance of the original inside the “rule” that forbids speakers from producing a specific
type of sentence in the TL. In the translation it keeps the extent of grammatical and lexical
divergence from SL norms and ‘passes on’ ethnic words. The aim of this method of
translation is to be totally faithful to the target ‘and the text-realisation of the SL writer.’
(Newmark 1988:46). In From my point of view, this method of translation makes an
attempt to keep a decent degree of resemblance of tone and form.
Semantic translation

First of all, the difference between semantic and faithful translation is that, faithful
translation is rigid and assertive, whereas semantic translation can effortlessly change
depending on the situation. The sSemantic translation has to take into consideration the
aesthetic value. These values are the delightful and natural sounds of the SL text. As
Newmark (1988) states, this method ‘may translate less important cultural words by
culturally neutral third or functional terms but not by cultural equivalents.’ (Newmark
1988:46). This means that even if the cultural words are not so significant they are
translated in the semantic process by words that have a small amount of lexical meaning
and communicate grammatical relationships between other words inside a sentence. They
are not necessarily translated by the identical meaning illustrated by a different expression.

Adaptation

Adaptation is the most freest method of translation, . It is applied first and foremost for
plays;. The in light and humorous drama with a happy ending and other literary genres, the
content, the fictional characters, the storyline are all generally maintained in their original
state (Newmark, 1988:PAGE). The form of the SL culture is changed to the TL culture, and
simultaneously the written text is rephrased in order to improve it. Several weak
adjustments have been made in the process of translating literally a poem or play and then
rephrasing it by a certified poet or a playwright. Fortunately, further adjustments have
saved historical plays.

Free translation

Without a specific technique, free translation makes an exact likeness of the subject that
is an important object of interest or concern, and, . Aat the same time, it reproduces the
ideas that are included in a piece of writing without taking into consideration the structure
of the authentic work (Newmark, 1988:46). Frequently, it is considerably an extended
explanation compared to the original, because it. It also contains too many words and in
certain cases even an extravagant style is used. The purpose of free translation, is to catch
‘the sense of a longer stretch of language.’ (Newmark 1988:46). To sum up the writers
statement, in this method of translation the meaning of words or sentences is exaggerated
to a second meaning. The fFree translation gives us the possibility to translate ‘outside the
box’ (Newmark, 1988:PAGE). In this particular process every translator has the chance to
think differently, unconventionally or form a new perspective.

Idiomatic translation

Idiomatic translation recreates a piece of conveyed information of the initial text and it is
likely to deform a subtle distinction of meaning, by showing. It shows partiality towards
words or phrases that are not in the original text and that express something other than their
literal sense and are utilized in typical or common discussions (Newmark, 1988:PAGE). In
this method of translation there are several strategies, because. I in different situations, a
particular strategy has to be used so as to make a translation as good as possible. In the
process of translating idioms and fixed expressions, a translator has to have a proper
knowledge of both languages that he uses at translating the idioms and fixed expressions.

Communicative translation

Communicative translation makes an effort to reproduce the accurate context of the

original so that the main ideas that are in a piece of writing and the language are easily
understood by the readers (Newmark, 1988:PAGE). This method of translation
concentrates on people who are fond of reading, taking into account the explanation of the
unclear words and anticipating to makein an attempt to make the translation an effortless,
short and also a comprehensible translation. According to Newmark (1988:PAGE),
‘Wwhere is required, this kind of translation has to acclaim the reader’s cultural
environment, in order to convey a few foreign constituents’. The adoption of
communicative translation is not equal to disregarding syntactic equivalence. For the
purpose of making the translation in line with the target language form, the translator has
to be free of the rules of the source language, moving foreign elements into local
expressions, while facilitating the understanding of the readers.

Remarks on these methods

After reading and understanding the methods of translation, in my point of view I can
stateTo summarize, I believe that the semantic and communicative translation are the ones
that achieve the two principal objectives of translation: . These two principal objectives of
translation are the faithful representation of the truth and the economy. A communicative
translation is not likely to be as economical as a semantic translation. An exception is when
the writing in the text is misspelled. Generally speaking, at the linguistic level of the author
a semantic translation is written. The communicative translation belongs to the reader. On
the one hand, the expressive texts, that are written literary forms such as narration, poetry
and metaphor, which can be used as tools to represent meanings and feelings transmitted in
an experiencein a text are all translated by using the semantic translation. On the other
hand, the communicative translation is used for texts that provide information and makes
readers to act in a certain way (vocative texts):. ‘stock and dead metaphors, normal
collocations, technical Terms, slang, colloquialisms, standard notices, phaticisms, ordinary
language’ are all considered identical by the semantic and communicative translation.
(Newmark 1988:47).

Uncommon syntactic structures, the group of words that often go together, figures of
speech, words that are different and odd from the usual and new terms are expressive
constituents of the so-called 'expressive' texts are at the same time closely provided. When
these constituents come into sight in vocative and informative texts, they are standardized
and adjusted so as to be less extreme or intense. Cultural elements have the tendency to be
conveyed undamaged in expressive texts. In informative texts, they also have to be
conveyed and described by culturally neutral words or phrases, whereas in vocative texts,
the cultural equivalents have to take place of the elements. If the incorrect or wrongly
written parts that are taken out from longer works are expressive, they have to be left
unchanged in translation. Most of the time, if necessary, the translator is ought to comment
on any wrong judgements of truth or morality. In communicative translation, the incorrect
or wrongly written parts that are taken out from longer works are under necessity to be
corrected. They expressly refer to sacred texts. Semantic and communicative translation
has to be perceived as having all its proper parts or components. The semantic translation
is distinctive and has a real and independent existence: . It goes after the author’s process
of combining ideas into coherent object of thoughts, it is likely to add information that is
not within the original, is a subtle distinction of the sense, and takes a concise look to
reproduce the pragmatic effect (Newmark, 1988:PAGE). The communicative translation
relates to the society, it concentrates on the communication, it probably leaves out
information that is not in the original, is can be easily understood, so it does not present
any difficulty, it is direct and brief. It is constantly composed in an accustomed and
inventive style. To sum up these remarks, a semantic translation has to translate orally or
into sign language the words of a person speaking a different language, whereas a
communicative translation has to make clear and easy to understand the given information.
The semantic translation has no more power to act, speak or think as one wants than the
communicative translation.

Equivalent effect

In Newmark’s (1988:PAGE) opinion, In some cases, it has been said that the main purpose
of any translation should be to obtain an ‘equivalent effect’, which means . In this
equivalent effect, athe translator creates the same effect of a text or one as close as
possible. In my opinion, under certain circumstances, this equivalent effect is suitable for
bringing out an advantageous consequence, instead of the desired outcome of any
translation. Besides being a desirable result, this effect is absolutely necessary, . Iit is a
standard, by which the ability to be successful, to produce and achieve intended results
must be evaluated.

For Newmark (1988:PAGE), Tthe equivalent effect in informative texts is not able to be
achievedpossible if the SL and TL culture are taken away from each other, because under
normal circumstances the cultural elements need to be made clear by describing the
culturally neutral or generic elements in more details. Also, the subject matter has to be
made easier to understand and the SL problems need to be more comprehensible. The first
problem in semantic translation, is the imaginative literature. It describes all the literature
that departs from the real. The standard varieties of imaginative literature are science
fiction, fantasy and horror. Unfortunately, the problem is that there are independent readers
instead of groups of readers. In the second place, as long as the reader is not completely
ignored, basically the translator is attempting to provide the effect that the SL has on
himself and to relate to the author’s emotional experience. Newmark (1988:PAGE) argues
that in fictional literature, Tthe equivalent effect is mostly based on feelings rather than
facts or proof. This could be examined, but as is frequently the case, the research would be
more trouble than it is worth. Nevertheless, it is reasonably used in proper conversations.
In conclusion, the concept of equivalent effect is to a large extent a significant part of
translation theory that has a level of application to any kind of texts, but does not have the
identical level of importance.

1.4 Literary translation

1.5 Young adult literature and its translation

In conclusion, I made evidentthis chapter highlighted the fact that translation is a modest,
but fast-growing industry, it presented an overview of the translation types proposed by
Newmark (YEAR) and …………….. At the same time, is fact-based and deals with ethical
veracity. Every translation has to be precise. They also have to be composed carefully and
pleasantly. A semantic translation has to translate orally or into sign language the words of
a person speaking a different language, whereas a communicative translation has to make
clear and easy to understand the given information. The semantic translation has no more
power to act, speak or think as one wants than the communicative translation.