Position of ideology The ideology of translation could be traced in both process and product of translation which are, however,

closely interdependent. The ideology of a translation, according to Tymoczko (2003), will be a combination of the content of the source text and the various speech acts represented in the source text relevant to the source context, layered together with the representation of the content, its relevance to the receptor audience, and the various speech acts of the translation itself addressing the target context, as well as resonance and discrepancies between these two utterances. However, she further explains that the ideology of translation resides not simply in the text translated, but in the voicing and stance of the translator, and in its relevance to the receiving audience (pp. 18283). Schffner (2003) explains: Ideological aspect can [] be determined within a text itself, both at the lexical level (reflected, for example, in the deliberate choice or avoidance of a particular word []) and the grammatical level (for example, use of passive structures to avoid an expression of agency). Ideological aspects can be more or less obvious in texts, depending on the topic of a text, its genre and communicative purposes. (p. 23) Ideological aspects can also be examined in the process of text production (translating) and the role of the translator as a target text producer as well as a source text interpreter.

Ideology and the translator as a reader of the source text: Poststructuralism Before the emergence of poststructuralism, structuralists like Saussure, defined language as the scientifically examinable world of symbols constituting the linguistic system and social structure within which the individual is socially shaped. The structuralists believed that language is constructed as a system of signs, each sign being the result of conventional relation between word and meaning, between a signifier (a sound or sound-image) and a signified (the referent, or concept represented by the signifier) (Roman, 2002: 309). Derrida, another poststructuralist, draws attention from the signifieds to the chain of signifiers, as Roman (2002) explains: Derrida takes the structure of sign from Saussure, but transforms it into a fluid entity, whereby meaning and writing consist solely in signifiers. Signifiers refer only to each other and meaning becomes unstable since any deferral to yet another signifier implies a difference in an endless chain of signification. This is the meaning of the French term diffrence (from the French verb diffrer, with its polysemantics of to differ and to delay), or Diffrance, a neologism created by Derrida particularly to express the indeterminacy of meaning. (p. 311) According to Venuti (1992), poststructuralist thinkers believe that the original is itself a translation, an incomplete process of translating a signifying chain into univocal signified, and this process is both displayed and further complicated when it is translated by another signifying chain in a different language. The originality of the

foreign text is thus compromised by the poststructuralist concept of textuality. Neither the foreign nor the translation is an original semantic unity; both are derivative, consisting of diverse linguistic and cultural materials, making meaning plural and differential (p. 7). In the same way, neither the author nor the translator as a reader of source text possesses the authorial power to definitely determine the meaning; and the authority will always remain collective due to endless circle of signification. Poststructuralist textuality redefines the notion of equivalence in translation by assuming from the outset that the differential plurality in every text precludes a simple correspondence of meaning, and a ratio of loss and gain inextricably occurs during translation process (Venuti, 1992: 78). Similarly, Carbonell (1996) points out that, since the nature of the context of signification in both the source and target cultures is heterogeneous, meaning changes unavoidably in the process of translation and there will be always possibility of contradiction between the authors intentions and the translators (p. 98). Ideology and the translator as a writer of the target text: Functionalism Functionalism is a major shift from linguistic equivalence to functional appropriateness. From the perspective of functional approaches to translation (particularly, under the influence of Holz-Mnttris theory of translational action), translation is viewed as a communicative act. In this view, translation is conceived primarily as a process of intercultural communication, whose end product is a text which is capable of functioning appropriately in specific situations and context of use (Schffner, 1998a: 3). The principles of translational (translatorial) action theory then founded the basis of Vermeers Skopos theory. Skopos is a technical term for the aim or purpose of a translation (Vermeer, 2000: 221). Skopostheorists assert that any action has an aim, a purpose. Focusing on the purpose of translation as the most decisive factor in translation action, skopos theory emphasizes the role of the translator as an expert in translational action and regards the source text no longer as the sacred original from which the skopos (purpose) of the translation is deduced, but as a mere offer of information whose role in the action is to be decided by the translator, depending on the expectations and needs of the target readers (Hnig, 1998: 9). Schffner (1998b) explains The translator offers information about certain aspects of the source-text-in-situation, according to the target text skopos specified by the initiator (p. 236). Skopos theory and functionalism focus on the translator, giving him/her more freedom and at the same time more responsibility, as Hnig (1998) asserts: [The translator] may be held responsible for the result of his/her translational acts by recipients and clients. In order to act responsibly, however, translators must be allowed the freedom to decide in co-operation with their clients what is in their best interests. (p. 10)

An awareness of the requirements of the skopos, Vermeer maintains, expands the possibilities of translation, increases the range of possible translation strategies, and releases the translator from the corset of an enforced and hence often meaningless literalness (qtd. in Shuttleworth & Cowie, 1997: 156). The translator thus becomes a target-text author freed from the limitations and restrictions imposed by a narrowly defined concept of loyalty to the source text alone (Schffner, 1998b: 238). Hnig (1998: 14) usefully contrasts the characteristics of functional approaches vs. non-functional approaches as follows:

FUNCTIONALIST Translator Is loyal to his client Must be visible Translation processes should be Target text oriented Aim of translation is Communicative acceptability Translation tools taken from Psycho-, sociolinguistics, text linguistics

NON-FUNCTIONALIST Faithful to the author Should be invisible

Source text oriented

Linguistic equivalence

Contrastive linguistics lexical semantics (applying rules)

(supporting decisions)

Analogy Building bridge Crossing river

Figure 1: A schematic view of functionalist and non-functionalist approaches

Norms Toury (1999) defines norm in terms of the translation of general values or ideas shared by a groupas to what is conventionally right and wrong, adequate and inadequate into performance instructions appropriate for and applicable to particular situations (p. 14). Taking into consideration the definition of ideology by van Dijk (1996) as the organized evaluative beliefs shared by social groups, normsas defined by Toury (1999)seem to have much in common with ideology; in other words, norms can be understood as ideological realization of the concept of appropriateness and correctness.

Decision-making is a key concept in the discussion of norms. Norms exist only in situations which allow for alternative kind of behavior, involving the need to select among these, with the additional condition that selection be non -random (Toury, 1999: 15). Toury (2000) claims that norms govern every level of decision -making in the translating process from choice of text to translate to the very final choices of translatio n strategies of action. He, consequently, introduces three kinds of norm: 1) initial norm; 2) preliminary norms; and 3) operational norms. Initial norm governs the translators overall decisions to adhere either to the original text, with the norms it has realized, or to the norms active in the target culture, or in that section of it which would host the end product (Toury, 2000: 201). Toury (2000), however, denies the necessity of full conformity between an overall decision made and every single decision be made in the lower-levels of translation process; and, consequently, denies the existence of absolute regularity in translational behaviors (p. 201). The options which are made available to the translator by Tourys initial norm are very similar to those which Venuti (1998b: 240) talks about in his foreignizing and domesticating strategies of translation. Preliminary norms govern the decisions to be made concerning translation policy and directness. According to Toury (2000: 202), translation policy re fers to those factors that govern the choice of text types; or individual texts, to be imported through translation into a particular culture/language at a particular point in time. He further explains that considerations concerning directness of translation involve the threshold of tolerance for translating from languages other than the ultimate source language (p. 202). Operational norms direct the actual decisions made during the act of translation and are subdivided into matricial and textual-linguistic norms. Matricial norms govern the segmentation and distribution of textual materials in the target text. Textual -linguistic norms govern the selection of material to formulate the target text in, or replace the original textual and linguistic material with (Toury, 2000: 2023). It should be noted that, according to Toury (2000), There is no necessary identity between the norms themselves and any formulation of them in language (p. 200). He believes that the observed regularities in translational behaviors are not themselves the norms; they are rather external evidence which reflect the existence of norms (Toury, 1999: 15). Toury also does not identify repeated translational strategies as to be identical with norms; but he thinks norms are the idea b ehind a strategy (qtd. in Schffner, 1999: 84). Therefore, Bakers interpretation of norms as regularities of translational behavior within a specific socio-cultural situation (Baker, 1998: 163) or strategies of translation which are repeatedly opted for, in preference to other available strategies, in a given culture or textual system (qtd. in Shuttleworth & Cowie, 1997: 114) seems to be an oversimplification of this concept.

Chesterman (1993) looks at the concept of norms from a different perspective. Whereas Toury does not pay too much heed to the role of the readership and their feedback in norm construction, Chesterman (1993: 8) puts distinction between expectancy norms, which are the expectations of the target readership and the client etc., and th e professional norms which explain the translator's tendency to observe these expectancy norms. According to Toury (2000), norms themselves actually are not observable. He declares that what are actually available for observation are rather norm-governed instances of behavior or the products of such behavior (p. 206). Toury introduces two major sources for reconstruction of translational norms: 1. Textual: the translated text themselves, for all kinds of norms, as well as analytical inventories of translation (i.e., virtual texts), for various preliminary norms; 2. Extratextual: semi-theoretical or critical formulations, such as perspective theories of translation, statements made by translators, editors, publishers, and other persons involved in or connected with the activity, critical appraisals of individual tr anslations, or the activity of a translator or school of translators, and so forth. (Toury, 2000: 207) Likewise, Baker (1998) introduces studying of a corpus of authentic translations as a means for identifying regular instances of translational behavior which are represented in that corpus by the translator, and, thus, for identifying the translational norms (p. 164).
http://www.translationdirectory.com/article233.htm

Story Theater One day a hungry beggar went to the house of a rich man. He asked for something to eat. The rich man invited the beggar in and gave him some soup. The beggar drank the soup very quickly. When he finished the rich man asked, Do you want more to eat? No thanks,the beggar answered. That was enough. Im full. But the rich man didnt stop. He gave the beggar some delicious chocolate cake. The beggar quickly finished the food again. why do you lie to methe rich man asked. Every time I ask you if you want more to eat, you say no; but every time I give you more, you eat it quickly. The beggar looked around. Outside the kitchen there was a box. He filled the box with stones and asked the rich man, Is this box full? Of course its full, the rich man answered. Then, the beggar put some sand in the box that was full of stones. Is this box full? he asked again. Of course its full, the rich man answered. Then, the beggar got a pail of wter. He poured the wter into the box that was full of stones and sand. You see, he said to the rich man. Every time I ask you if the box is full, you say yes; but every time you say yes, I fill the box again. Its the same thing with the food you gave me. Theres always room for more.

Functionalist Translation By Paola Arteaga Cesar Morales Historia de teatro Un dia un hambriento mendigo fue a la casa de un hombre rico. El le pidi algo para comer. El hombre rico lo invit y le dio un poco de sopa. El mendigo se tom la sopa rapidamente. Cuando termin el hombre rico le pregunt Quieres mas comida? No, gracias, el mendigo respondi. Eso fue suficiente, estoy lleno . Pero el hombre rico le dio un gran plato lleno de comida El mendigo se lo termin muy rapido tambien. Quieres mas comida? El hombre rico le volvi a preguntar. No, gracias, respondi el mendigo. Eso fue suficiente, estoy lleno.
Comment [W4]: To whom? check

Comment [W1]: Where? Check it

Comment [W2]: Who? Comment [W3]: Is this the right translation?

Comment [W5]: check

Pero el hombre rico no se detuvo. El le dio al mendigo un poco de una deliciosa torta de chocolate. El mendigo comi rapidamente otra vez. Por qu me mientes? Pregunt el hombre rico. Cada vez te pregunto si quieres mas comida y me dices que no, pero cada vez que te doy mas, te la comes rapidamente. El mendigo miro a su alrededor. Fuera de la cocina habia una caja. El lleno una caja con piedras y le pregunto al hombre rico, Esta llena la caja? Por supuesto que esta llena, respondi el hombre rico. Luego el mendigo coloco un poco de arena en la caja que estaba llena de piedras. Esta llena la caja?Le pregunto otra vez. Por supuesto que esta llena, respondi el hombre rico. Luego el mendigo tomo un balde con agua. El derram el agua dentro de la caja que estaba llena con piedras y arena. Ves, el le dijo al hombre rico. Cada vez que yo te preguntaba si la caja estaba llena, tu decias si, pero cada vez que decias que si, yo llenaba la caja otra vez. Pasa lo mismo con la comida que me diste. Siempre hay espacio para mas.
Comment [W6]: check

Comment [W7]: check tense

No books and 150 students? A well-known and persistent problem with teaching English as a Foreing Language (EFL) is thelack of resources. Imagine, if you can, teaching without books, having no photocopy machine available, and not even having office space. Such conditions are an everyday reality for many teachers around the world. Although the construction of selfaccess-centers with modern omputer equipment, internet access, andmultimedia technology is relieving this situation, in numerous institutions students and teachers still lack even the most basic materials. An additional impediment to effective language instruction is too many students in one class. Many EFL teacher would consider it a luxury to have a maximum of thirty students in a single class, as they customarily have to deal with many times that number.

Non functionalist translation By Elio Seco Marilin Torrelles No books and 150 students? Un problema bien conocido y persistente con la enseanza del ingls como un idioma extranero es la carencia de recursos. Imagina, si tu puedes, ensear sin libro, sin acceso a el internet, a una computadora, o incluso a un telefono, sin fotocopiadora disponible, y sin una oficina. Tales condiciones son la realidad diaria para muchos profesores alrededor del mundo. Aunque la construccion de centro de auto acceso a internet, y tecnologia multimedia esta mejorando esta situacion, en muchas instituciones estudiantes y profesores aun existe la carencia de los materiales mas basicos. Un impedimento adicional para la instruccin efectiva del idioma es demasiados estudiantes en una clase. Muchos prfesores del ingls como lengua extranjera considerarian un lujo tener un maximo de treinta estudiantes en una clase sencilla, como ellos cotidianamente deben lidiar muchas veces con este numero.
Comment [W8]: why don't you translate it??

Comment [W9]: there are some mistakes...

check them!!!
Comment [W10]: check Comment [W11]: check Comment [W12]: w.w. Comment [W13]: check

Comment [W14]: check meaning Comment [W15]: check

YOU ALL DID A GREAT JOB, but there are so many things to do to make your work better!!!

Assesments  You should have reviewed the material before doing the translation in order to be sure about the two approaches we already disscuss in class.  You needed to be sure about all their characteristics. (functionalist and non functionalist approaches).  You must explain what kind of text you used and why you chose it.  You must explain the approach you used according to the kind of text you already translated.  You should use other sources in order to be clear about the previous material. Note: You are going to use this information to prepare a presentation about the translation you already did. You could use the resources that you want to use in order to present a great explanation.  I am also sending you another material that we are going to disscuss for the next class.

Previous assesments: (31/08/10)

Bring the materials to do a semantic map about the theories we discussed. Bring the song with the lyrics. Use a dictionary in class. Using the words we don t know we are going to create phrases, sentences, or even paragraphs in order to give them context.