A Checklist of Linguistic and Cultural Problems in Translation

8/10/2019 A Checklist of Linguistic and Cultural Problems in Translation

1/22

APPENDIX 2

Problems in translation normally fall into two types: linguistic and cultural. Tis

appendi! treats linguistic problems.

Linguistic Problems in Translation"#yntactic and #emantic Problems$

A %ec&ist:

' (e!ical and )orpological Problems

'.' le!ical Ambiguity: Polysemy and *omonymy

'.2 (e!ical +aps: %ulturally ,ound Terms and (oanwords

'.- %ognates

'. %ollocations

'./ #cientific and Tecnical Terms

'.0 Affi!es

2. #yntactic Problems

2.' Prase #tructure

2.2 Number and +ender

2.- 1ord rder and Empasis

2. #tructural Ambiguity

2./ Time 3eference

- Ponological Problems

-.' Transliteration

#emantic Problems

.' Denotati4e 4s. %onnotati4e )eaning

.2 +eneral 4s. #pecific "Tecnical$ )eaning

.-. )odality

5ollowing te four le4els of linguistic analysis6 I will classify te linguisticproblems into four types: le!ical6 syntactic6 ponological and semantic problems.

1 Lexical and Morphological Problems

In general6 7ust as a writer faces te problem of te coice of proper words6 te

problem is doubled for a translator because te latter operates wit two linguistic

systems. Problems generated by te le!ical system of a language in translation are

numerous. I sall deal wit four suc problems6 wic I tin& are particularly

important: le!ical ambiguity "polysemy and omonymy$6 collocations6 scientific and


2/22

tecnical terms6 loanwords and culturally bound terms "in te #($6 le!ical gaps "in te

T($ and cognates.

1.1 Lexical Ambiguity: Polysemy and Homonymy

(e!ical ambiguity stems from two related penomena: a word tat is

polysemous in te #( or tat is a omonym. A polysemous word is one tat as more

tan one meaning. 1ords li&e 8eye86 8and86 8ead8 "parts of te uman body$6

8stand86 8sleep86 8rise8 "postures$ are li&ely to be polysemous in many languages. 6 i.e.

tey are almost bound to possess bot literal and figurati4e meanings. ,ut tere may

be no correspondences between languages. In Englis 9and may denote all of te

following: part of te arm; power6 possession; influence; a ired labourer; a round of

applause; pysical assistance te two words 9cape are

omonyms. Te word ban& and conse?uently te sentence =I4e 7ust come from a

ban&> is ambiguous. b4iously6 polysemy and omonymy "te latter is also &nown as

9sared e!ponence in %atford "'@0/> @$ terms$ constitute a problem for translators.

Nida "'@0@: 0-$ diminises te problem of polysemy claiming tat =te different

meanings of a single word are rarely in competition6 for tey not only a4e relati4ely

welldefined mar&ers wic elp to differentiate te meanings6 but so often are so

di4erse as not to compete wit one anoter for te same semantic domain>. It is true6

tat te conte!t fre?uently elps in a te!t but not always. Tis problem of ambiguity is

doubled wen it is deliberate "or6 again to use %atfords6 '@0/: @ terms wen it is

9functionally rele4ant$ in te #T as wen eiter polysemy or omonymy are meant

for some retorical purpose "pun6 alliteration6 etc.$ in a literary or poetical wor& andtere is no corresponding e?ui4alent in te T(.

1.2 Lexical Gaps: ulturally !ound Terms and Loan"ords

#ince cultures differ in significant ways6 culturally bound terms may a4e no

e?ui4alents in te T(. 1ords referring to religious practices suc as BC 6FGH BC

FGJK "ablution$6 FLM 6OQR6 to cultural practices suc #aint Salentines Day 6

Tan&sgi4ing day6 tan&sgi4ing6 etc. may a4e no e!act e?ui4alents in oter


3/22

languages. In tis case tey can eiter be translated by te nearest e?ui4alent6 by

substituting te term wit a definition or transferred into te T(. In tis latter case6

wic is te only procedure tat preser4es te e!actness and specificity of te original

words6 tey become loanwords. ,y subse?uent use tey may become adopted and

adapted to te T( ponological and syntactic rules and considered standard.

#ometimes loanwords occur in te #( for a specific stylistic effect. A caracter

in a no4el6 for e!ample6 may use loanwords for te prestige 4alue tey gi4e im. In

tis latter case tey are simply transferred as a wole6 i.e. preser4ed in te TT if tey

acie4e te same effect. Sery fre?uently6 owe4er6 a loan word in te #( is better

rendered by a loanword from anoter language in te TT. In )orocco6 for e!ample6 it

is primarily 5renc terms and sometimes Englis terms wic gi4e te spea&er a

prestige. +erman loanwords are simply not &nown in )orocco.

Anoter source of le!ical gaps in a language is te noncongruity of

morpological systems of languages and te subse?uent noncongruity of produced

words or terms. A feature tat is systematically encoded in language6 let us say te

incoati4e "e.g. UVWY6 be Z become Z get cut$ or causati4e in Arabic6 or te infinite

meanings associated wit affi!es in Englis may not be encoded in anoter.

Ne4erteless6 wate4er idea is encoded in one language can also be e!pressed in

anoter; if not so elegantly at least by a paraprase or e!planation. Terefore le!ical

gaps do not raise an insurmountable problem for translators.

1.# ognates

#ometimes6 students translating a te!t easily fall into te trap of a cognate. =A

word is cognate wit anoter if bot deri4e from te same word in an ancestral

language> "WordWeb Thesaurus$. Now te problem is tat seemingly identical words

in two different languages do not necessarily con4ey te same meaning. Tese arecalled false friends6 or fau! amis in 5renc. ,y way of illustration6 9ner4ous in

Englis6 wic means 9an!ious6 afraid is different in meaning from 5renc 9ner4eu!6

wic means 9angry. #imilarly6 Englis 9sympatetic6 wic means 9sowing or

feeling sympaty and compassion6 is different from 5renc 9sympati?ue6 wic

means 9nice6 agreeable and li&able.

1.$ ollocations


4/22

%ollocations migt engender 4arious problems in te process of translation.

,efore discussing tese problems it is first necessary to define and illustrate te notion

of collocation. Te latter refers to te li&eliood of "potential or abitual$ co

occurrence between words "i.e. teir collocability$. In oter words it =refers to te

restrictions on ow words can be used togeter> "[ac& 3icards6 et al.6 '@\/$. #ome

words "core words6 e.g. determiners$ readily collocate wit a wide range of words

"e.g. thepostman6 theletter6 a boy6 etc.$. ters a4e a restricted distribution: tey

collocate wit only some words. 5or e!ample6 some prepositions are used wit

particular 4erbs "S ]P$6 some ad7ecti4es wit particular nouns "Ad7. ] N$ and some

4erbs wit particular nouns "S ] $. Tese are analy^ed as idioms6 prasal 4erbs and

clic_s.

=%ollocations are6 ten6 a type of syntagmatic le!ical relation "%rystal6 '@\/$.

5or e!ample6 in Englis6 9to e&e is bound to occur wit 9out as in 9to e&e out

ones li4eliood "` to li4e from day to day6 as wit some ardsip6 a prasal 4erb$.

1e also say 9to perform an operation but we say 9to old or to a4e a discussion.

Terefore6 9to perform is said 9to collocate "i.e. is used$ wit 9operation and 9old or

a4e wit 9discussion "S]$. Again6 in all li&eliood6 9blond"e$ will occur wit

9air. It is unli&ely tat it will occur wit car or pencil. 9,lond and 9air are said to

collocate "Ad7. ] N$. #imilarly6 we say 9arms folded6 9legs crossed6 9ands clasped6

altoug it is basically te same gesture.

As to te problems engendered by collocations6 tese are similar to tose

engendered by idioms in general. In particular6 te patterns of collocations may bedifferent in te #( and T( and tus cause te translator to run into te pitfalls of

misinterpreting or misrendering te source collocations. 5or e!ample6 9to pay a 4isit

can be translated into Arabic as or O CWnot h "wic is te literal

translation$6 and into 5renc as 9rendre une 4isite. In Arabic 9 jFkCWY or CWY

are acceptable collocations. In Englis6 on te oter and6 te acceptable

corresponding collocations are 94iolating or brea&ing te law "not contradicting te

law$. Translators are ad4ised to be aware of problems of interference form te #("especially te moter tongue$ and6 unless tere is a good reason for doing it6 not to


5/22

carry o4er from te #( collocational patterns wic are untypical of or unacceptable

in te T(.

Anoter problem wit collocations as to do wit te nona4ailability of a

corresponding natural and accurate "e!act$ collocation or term in te T(6 i.e. a natural

T( collocation tat preser4es te original meaning. *ere a possible solution is te

coice of a 9typical ")ona ,a&er6 $ e4en toug not necessarily e!act

translational e?ui4alent. )ona ,a&er "cec& pro4ides te following e!ample.

=cec& Te Englis collocation 9ard drin&s as as its e?ui4alent in Arabic 9alcoolic

drin&s. *ard drin& refers to spirits6 namely wis&y6 gin6 and brandy; wereas te

Arabic collocation refers to any alcoolic drin& including beer6 lager6 serry6 as well as

spirits. Terefore6 te meanings of te two collocations do not map completely>. In

fact6 tey do not a4e te same reference. %onse?uently tere is a loss of e!actness.

#ometimes a collocation in te #( is better translated by an e!planatory

definition or paraprase. Te Englis collocation a ea4y smo&er migt be translated

as qGkY M q6 not witout some loss of meaning.

Anoter problem wit te translation of collocations concerns wat )ona ,a&er

"' : $ calls mar&ed collocations in te #T. #ev " $ defines tem as =unusual

combinations of words6 ones tat callenge our e!pectations as earers and readers6

in4ol4e deliberate confusion of collocational range to create new images. Tis is

often used in fiction. #e " $ pro4ides te following e!ample =%anada as

cosen to 9entrenc its dual cultural 9eritage in its institutions>. Te mar&ed

collocation ere is 9to entrenc eritage6 wic creates an unusual image. Te

problem6 ten6 is to first recogni^e te collocation in te #( as mar&ed or unusual and6

second6 to ideally render it in te T( by a similarly mar&ed collocation. A 5renc

translator rendered te pre4ious e!ample as =%anada a coisi 9dencsser x le mot

est _las z la mode son double 9_ritage{ ")ona ,a&er6 : $. In Arabic onemigt a4e said |h}Y ~YF Qk Fk FGHO } YQ kY. Te translator fins

imself in a dilemma: te constraints of te T( on te one and and te specificity of

te #( collocation on te oter and.

1.% &cienti'ic and Technical Terms

#ome languages belonging to tecnologically underde4eloped countries a4e a

sortage of scientific and tecnical terms. Tis 4aries in degree from language tolanguage. Arabic6 for e!ample6 suffers from tis problem6 but to a lesser e!tent


6/22

compared wit ,erber and to a larger e!tent compared wit 5renc. Te sortage of

scientific and tecnical terms in some languages is due to te differences in te word

formation processes in languages. Affi!es6 for e!ample6 play a ma7or role in te

production of terms in te IndoEuropean languages. Not so in Arabic. Tis issue will

be discussed at lengt in terminological problems in nit .

#ometimes e4en seemingly ordinary words a4e no e?ui4alents in oter

languages. Arabic distinguises between M and k6 on te one and6 and }M and k6

on te oter and. 5renc and Englis use a single word "oncle6 in 5renc6 uncle6 in

Englis$ to refer to bot M and k and single word "tante6 in 5renc6 aunt6 in Englis$

to refer to bot M and k. Englis distinguises between finger and toe. 5renc and

Arabic use a single word to refer to bot. ,erber uses one term to refer to green and

blue. In most cases translation is not affected by suc minor problems unless of course

te 4ery words are at te source of some word game or stylistic effect. Te translator

as6 ne4erteless6 to be aware of te issue and opt for te most con4enient solution

"e.g. by modifying a word in te T( by te use of an ad7ecti4e or a ad7ecti4al prase6

etc.$. If a le!ical item "e.g. days of te wee&6 monts of te year6 numbers6 and te

sun6 te moon6 te eart6 etc.$ are pro4ed to a4e e!act e?ui4alents "i.e. isomorpous

units$ in all or most &nown languages tey may be considered as le!ical uni4ersals

"Newmar&6 : $.

1.( A''ixes

2. &yntactic or Grammatical Problems

+rammar is a umbrella term tat refers in te opinions of most linguists to

synta! "te structure of prases6 clauses and sentences$ and morpology "te structure

of words$. #ome of te morpological problems a4e already been dealt wit in tefirst section. As to te syntactic problems ob4iously =Te syntactic structure of a

language or te!t$ imposes certain restrictions on te way messages may be organi^ed

in tat language> "Newmar&6 ' : $ or ")ona ,a&er6 '@@2: $ and ultimately

determine meaning.

2.1 Phrase &tructure

Not all syntactic problems a4e to do wit word order. #ome errors a4e to dowit wat one considers as te &ey word in te prase. In te Englis prase 9wit


7/22

modest means 9means is te &ey word of te prase not 9modest6 wic is an

ad7ecti4e. As suc6 te proper translation into Arabic is not UYCObut YC CO.

2.2 )umber and Gender

Te grammatical categories of number and gender may also raise problems in

translation since tey are eiter missing in some languages or tey are by no means

identical. To start wit te grammatical category of number6 or 9countability6 Arabic6

on te one and6 and 5renc and Englis6 on te oter and6 4iew te notion in

different ways. Arabic uses a treesome system distinguising between te singular

"one$6 te dual "two$ and te plural "i.e. more tan two$ not only to mar& nouns but

also 4erbs. Te differences are le!icali^ed in Arabic. It is possible in Arabic to say F

YY ~}Y "i.e. literally6 came te accused and te witnesses xtwo$.

#ince te Arabic sentence e!plicitly refers to two eyewitnesses it is not difficult

to encode te notion in Englis by using a numeral "namely by using te word two$.

,ut it is not always tis easy. In te Arabic 4erse Q GH F q H "literally6

alt you two6 and let us weep for te memory of a belo4ed and a ome$6 were te

imperati4e 4erb is used in te dual6 te translator will be in a dilemma. *e can eiter

try and find some de4ice for rendering te notion of te dual or simply ignore it as

irrele4ant and unnatural in te T(. Anoter problem arises wen translating from

Englis into Arabic. *ere a translator as to le!ically and grammatically encode

differences in number wic in te source te!t are only con4eyed by te conte!t.6

ence te importance of conte!t.

As to gender6 te engendered problems in translation are more serious. True6

gender studies a4e progressed enormously in te last two decades and a4e gi4en

rise to some of te most interesting ideas. #o wat is gender after allv +ender refers =a

grammatical distinction according to wic a noun or pronoun is classified as eitermasculine or feminine in some languages> ")ona ,a&er6 : $ wit te furter

agreement of sub7ect "wic is a noun or pronoun$ and 4erb6 or ad7ecti4e and noun6 in

terms of tis grammatical category in inflected languages. As wit number6 languages

differ since tey may not a4e gender systems at all or may not a4e identical ones.

In some languages gender is ?uite arbitrary but in some oters it is usually based

on se! or animateness or bot. ,ot 5renc and Arabic classify not only pronouns "as

in Englis$ but also nouns into eiter masculine or feminine usually depending on se!.,ut tey sometimes differ in wat tey consider as feminine or masculine. If a 9car is


8/22

feminine in bot6 te 9moon is feminine in 5renc and masculine in Arabic6 te 9sun

is masculine in 5renc and feminine in Arabic6


9/22

#ince syntactic structures con4ey meanings6 canges in te structures ultimately

lead to canges in meaning. If a #( te!t consists of sort sentences6 te translator is

e!pected to translate tem by sort sentences and again if it consists of long sentences

te translator is e!pected to render tem by long ones unless sort and long sentences

function differently6 i.e. a4e different communicati4e functions6 in te two languages.

%ompared wit Englis6 wic is a #S language wit a mar&edly fi!ed word order

"meaning tat te word order is essential to te meaning of te sentence$6 Arabic is a

S# language wit a relati4ely free word order.

ne te most common errors made by students is substituting an unmar&ed

structure in te #( by a mar&ed one in te T(6 tus failing to obser4e te differences

in te grammatical structures between languages and accidentally canging te focus

or e4en te meaning of te message. In order to appreciate tis fact we must ma&e a

distinction between wat is gi4en and wat is new in a message. A sentence normally

consists of two components: one con4eys information wic is already &nown to te

earer "i.e. te teme$ and te oter con4eys new information tat te spea&er wises

to con4ey "i.e. te reme$. In a basic sentence structure te sub7ect of a sentence is

almost te teme and te predicate te reme.

Tere are structures6 owe4er6 were a sub7ect pro4ides te new rater tan te

gi4en information. 5ailing to obser4e tis fact results in inaccurate translations. In te

e!ample =It is translation tat I li&e most>6 translation is presented as te new piece of

information and it is a structures tat is difficult to translate into Arabic. it is not

accurate to say in Arabic }RFY or }RFY F for te Englis sentence is a

cleft one. 5or te lac& of an e!act translation one migt say at least }RFY F H 6

wic at least focuses on te fact tat it is translation and not anyting else tat I li&e..

2.$ &tructural Ambiguity

Ambiguity is of two types: le!ical and grammatical "or structural$. *a4ing

discussed le!ical ambiguity in '.'6 it is now con4enient to define grammatical

ambiguity. Duff " : $ defines it as follows =+rammatical ambiguities arise wen te

point of stress in a clause or wen relationsips between words6 groups or clauses in a

longer unit are not clear6 i.e. on does not &now wat goes wit wat>. Te last

sentence in te ?uotation abo4e is particularly enligtening. It implies tat structural

ambiguity is bound to raise problems for te translator.


10/22

Te first problem wit ambiguity is caused by wat %atford "'@0/: @$ calls

sared e!ponence6 by wic e means =tose cases were two or more distinct

grammatical "or le!ical$ items are e!pounded in one and te same ponological or

grapological form>. *is e!ample is =Time flies>.6 wic ta&en as it is out of conte!t

can eiter mean: =*ow ?uic&ly time passes> or =)a&e obser4ations on te speed of

flies>. Te ambiguity is triggered by te fact tat =s> can eiter mar& te plural or te

tird person singular present. #imilarly6 in te famous sentence suggested by

%oms&y =5lying palanes can be dangerous>6 tere are two interpretations: eiter 9it

can be dangerous to fly planes or 9Planes tat are flying can be dangerous. ne can

list endless suc sentences. If pro4ided6 owe4er6 te conte!t will usually sow wat

interpretation is meant unless6 of course6 te 4ery ambiguity is deliberate.

A second case of ambiguity is caused by reference: te fact tat it is possible for

a pronoun to refer e?ually to two sub7ects or ob7ects. Tis problem is aggra4ated by

te fact tat Englis is not language tat is ric in case or gender endings. Duff " : $

pro4ides te following e!ample =In connection wit any contractto be financed by

te bank6 it"te ban&$ does not permit a borrower to. 9It is normally understood

as referring to

A tird case of ambiguity is related to compounds. Tere is first te problem tat

languages differ in te ma!imum lengt of a compound. +erman is6 for instance6

&nown to be capable of long compounds6 but Englis is less so and Arabic6 if one

migt tal& about compounds6 e4en less. Tere is te furter problem tat compounds

are potentially ambiguous. Te difficulty does not only lie in tat =a body guard

guards te body and a mud guard guards against te mud> "Duffv $6 but also tat

=a li?uid crystal display as tree readings. %ec& Te first refers to a display of

li?uid crystals6 te second to a li?uid display of crystals and te tird to a display tat

is li?uid and crystal. In tis case only &nowledge of te topic ma&es it possible for areader or translator to decide on one reading from tese tree as te most rele4ant

one>.

2.% Time -e'erence

Anoter ma7or difficulty in translation as to do wit te way eac language

mar&s or not relations in time and differences of aspect. Time relations =a4e to do

wit locating an e4ent in time. Te usual distinction is between past6 present andfuture> ")ona ,a&er6 '@@2: @\$. Aspectual differences = a4e to do wit te temporal


11/22

distribution of an e4ent6 for instance6 its completion or noncompletion6 continuation

or momentariness> ")ona ,a&er6 '@@2: @\$. Te fact tat languages ne4er mar& time

and aspect in te same say is empasi^ed by Alan Duff "'@\': 0$ wo says =te tree

main tense bloc&spast6 present and future is ne4er ?uite te same in any two

languages; eac language as its own proper mecanisms for mar&ing duration6

continuity6 possibility> "cec&$.

If languages differ in tat respect6 ten6 te translators 7ob is to find te best

way to render a specific notion from one language into anoter.

#. Phonological Problems

Te most prominent problem as far as te ponological le4el is concerned as to

do wit transliteration6 wic concerns primarily proper nouns "see nit \ and '' in

Translation I$.

$. &emantic Problems

Te semantic le4el constitutes te core of all linguistic le4els since te ultimate

aim of te translator "or language6 indeed$ is te e!pression and transfer of meaning.

Tis is te le4el were all te pre4ious problems are present: e?ui4alence "synonymy$

of words6 e?ui4alence of e!pressions6 e?ui4alence of collocations and idioms6 le!ical

ambiguity6 structural ambiguity6 etc.


12/22

In grammar6 modality refers to a classification of propositions "statements$

based on an assessment of te necessity or probability "possibility or impossibility$ of

wat is said. It is to be distinguised from modulation "see nit @$.

)odal 4erbs "a grammatical category$ constitute te primary source for

e!pressing modality in Englis. Tere are mar&ed differences between 9*e can Z may Z

migt Z sould Z must go. ,esides modal 4erbs6 Englis can e!press modality troug

non4erbal "le!ical$ categories namely ad4erbs "e.g. certainly6 possibly$ ad7ecti4es

"e.g. certain6 possible$ and nouns "e.g. certainty6 possibility$. )odality in Arabic is

acie4ed by 4arious le!ical items representing different word classes including a few

4erbs "e.g. JHQ 6q}$6 ad7ecti4es6 ad4erbs "} 6}O$6 nouns " $ and particles " 6$.

Apart from te fact tat modal 4erbs in Englis form a distinct grammatical category

wit definite syntactic caracteristics6 Arabic and Englis are similar in many

respects.

#ee *alliday6 '@: '\@

Turjuman6 '@@26 'Z'6 pp. ''''/

Linguistic Problems !arriers in Translation: 3urther -eading

,oo&s

(ado6 3. '@/. (inguistics Across %ultures. Ann Arbor6 Te ni4ersity of )iciganPress6 pp. @/ "ow to compare two sound systems$6 pp/' "ow to compare two4ocabulary systems$6 pp. @-'@ "ow to compare two writing systems$ )ounin6 '@0-6 (es Problmes T_ori?ues de la Traduction. %. '6 2 and -6 '/"linguistic barriers$ %atford6 [. %.6 '@0/. A (inguistic Teory of Translation. %. '- "language 4arietiesin translation$ Duff6 '@\'6 Te Tird (anguage. %. -.26 -.-6 -.6 -./ )oua&&et6 Amed6 '@\\. (inguistics and Translation: #emantic Problems in ArabicEnglis Translation. Damascus: Dar Tlass for #tudies6 Translation and Publication6 pp./\00 "semantic deri4ation and le!ical gaps$6 pp. 0 "dictionary meaning 4s.

conte!tual meaning$6 pp. '\ "polysemy$6 pp.\\- "synonymy and le!icaltranslatability$6 pp. \-'' "antonymy$6 pp. '@@2' "connotation$6 *atim 6 ,asil6 and Ian )ason6 '@@. Discourse and te translator. (ongman6 pp. 2/20 "contrasts between language systems$6 -\/- "registers6 dialects6 field of discourse6mode of discourse6 tenor of discourse$ owell6 . A^i^ and )ufta #. (ataiwis6 '@@@2. Principles of Translation. DarAnnada Alarabiya6 n.p.6 pp. ' "translation and meaning; reference6 denotation6connotation


13/22

iad ebbe6 ). and Ataf oussef6 '@@'. =(inguistic Problems in TranslationTeory>. (inguistica %ommunicatio6 Sol. -6 No. '6 pp. (e 5eal6 . De7ean6 '@@2. =(inguisti?ue et Traduction. Tur7uman6 Sol. '6 No. '6 pp. Ali6 #ala #alim6 '@@. =Temporality and Temporal Dimension in Translation wit3eference to ,atesons Translation of PreIslamic des>. Al(issan AlArabi6 No. 6

pp. \'\ )uammad 3a7i ugloul and *ussein #alama Abdul 5atta6 '@@@. =TemporalE!pession in Englis and Arabic: A %ase #tudy in %ontrasti4e le!ical #emantics>.(anguages and (inguistics6 International Periodical of linguistics edited by )oaEnna7i6 No. 6 pp. -@-

1eb pages"(anguage Ambiguity: a %urse and a ,lessing: ttp:ZZaccurapid.comZ$"1y cant a %omputer Translate )ore li&e a Person:ttp:ZZwww.ttt.orgZ $

APPENDIX -

ultural Problems in Translation

A %ec&list:

2. '. Denotation and %onnotation or Types of )eaning "Teories of )eaning$

2. 2. )etapors

2. -. Idioms

2. . Politeness 5ormulas and 5orms of Address

2. /. Te +ender of Inanimate Nouns

Irony

#ituation6 3ele4ance and te %ooperati4e Principle

+rices %on4ersational )a!ims

Taboos

Power and #ocial Distance

Problems related to cultural differences constitute te second type of problem

tat a translator faces in te course of translation. Tese cultural differences include

=many e!tralinguistic features6 suc as religion6 social bac&grounds6 unfamiliar

natural penomena6 and oters> ")oua&&et6 '@\\: '\$. 1e a4e already discussed

te relationsip between culture and language in nit '- =(anguage6 %ulture and

Translation>. 1e a4e also discussed some of te cultural problems in nit \

=Translation6 Translatability and ntranslatability$ and in nit @ =Adaptation or
http://accurapid.com/http://www.ttt.org/http://www.ttt.org/http://accurapid.com/http://www.ttt.org/


14/22

%ultural E?ui4alence> in te 5irst %ourseboo& in Translation. %ultural problems is an

umbrella term tat includes 4arious problems in te process of translation suc as

problems arising from mi!ing between te denotati4e and connotati4e meanings of

words6 forms of address6 and te problems associated wit idioms and metapors. Te

following ?uotation from #andor *er4ey and Ian *iggins" : $ stresses 7ust ow

serious cultural problems are in translation: =It is useful to discuss general cultural

differences as suc6 because tey are sometimes bigger obstacles to successful

translation tan linguistic ones>.

2.1 enotation and onnotation

Te first problem to be discussed in tis respect is te one associated wit

denotation and connotation. As is well &nown6 tere are two main types of meaning:

denotation and connotation. Denotation refers to te literal6 te referential6 ob7ecti4e6

cogniti4e or scientific meaning of a word. In Newmar&s "'@\': ''@$ terms

=Denotation is te direct specific meaning of a word6 optionally sown ostensibly "i.e.

in poto and diagram or by printing$ and described as far as possible in summary

obser4able terms> "cec&$. Te denotati4e meaning is normally te dictionary

definition or first definition of a word in a dictionary. In ,ells "'@@': @\$ terms it

is=.

%onnotation6 on te oter and6 refers to te metaporical6 emoti4e6 poetic or

associati4e meaning of a word. Newmar& "'@\': ''@$ defines it as ="cec&$ tat

aspect of meaning of a particular word or wordgroup wic is based on te feelings

and moral ideas it rouses in te transmitter or receptor6 in brief6 te meaning con4eyed

or suggested apart from te ting it e!plicitly names or describes>. As a matter of fact6

connotati4e meanings stem from our e!perience6 education6 religion6 culture6 andtraditions. 1ereas some words a4e only denotati4e meanings "i.e. neutral

meanings$ in a gi4en language or for "certain$ people in a gi4en society6 oters a4e

bot denotati4e and connotati4e meanings again depending on te same 4ariables. Te

problem for translation is tat connotations in a specific language and culture may not

be understood or may be strange to people of oter cultures.

To furter understand connotations and te problems tey cause to te translator

I sall distinguis between si! types of connotati4e meaning following #andor *er4eyand Ian *iggins " : $6 wic are te following: allusi4e meaning6 attitudinal


15/22

meaning6 associati4e meaning6 collocati4e meaning6 reflected meaning6 and affecti4e

meaning.

Te first type of connotati4e meaning is allusi/emeaning. Tis latter occurs

wen


16/22

qGM aynin Arabic. Tis term fre?uently refers to te organ of sigt6 i.e. an eye. Te

Arabic term6 owe4er6 refers also to a way of loo&ing at a person wic may cause

im arm "disease6 failure6 fall6 etc$. 1ate4er opinion we may a4e of tis meaning

as a superstitious belief or as a fact6 te point is tat an Englis spea&er is unli&ely to

understand tis associati4e meaning and te translator as to find ways of bringing te

association. #imilarly words suc as pig6 dog and don&ey a4e unpleasant negati4e

associations "connotations$ in te Arab culture besides teir denotati4e meanings6

associations wic are not te same in oter cultures. A symboli^es wisdom in te

European culture but it is associated wit bad luc& and is considered a bad omen in

te )oroccan culture.

Te four type of connotati4e meaning is collocati/emeaning6 wic is ac?uired

by a word or e!pression by 4irtue of its association or rater its collocation wit

anoter word. ..


17/22

#andor *er4ey and Ian *iggins (eecDenotati4e meaning6 Denotati4e6 conceptual meaning6

Allusi4e meaning =e4o&es a saying

or ?uotation..>

Attitudinal meaning =some

widespread attitude to te

referentAssociati4e meaning =e!pectations

tat are rigtly or wrongly

associated wit te referent>%ollocati4e meaning6 %ollocati4e meaning6 =1at is

communicated troug association

wit words wic tend to occur in te

en4ironment of anoter word>3eflected meaning6 3eflected meaning6 =1at is

communicated troug association

wit anoter sense of te same

e!pression>

Affecti4e meaning6 Affecti4e meaning6 =1at iscommunicated of te feelings and

attitudes of te spea&erZwriter>%onnotati4e meaning

#ocial meaning

Tematic meaning

It seems to me, that both taxonomies fail to take into account an

ideological meaning I referred to above. This meaning, as I said above,

involves the deliberate misinterpretation and manipulation of terms and

concepts to achieve specific ends.

2.2. Metaphors

Te second problem wic is associated wit culture relates to metapors. *ereare some dictionary definitions of a metapor. A metaphoris


18/22

8a figure of speec in wic an e!pression is used to refer to someting tat itdoes not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity8 "WordWeb Thesaurus)

=a way of describing someting by comparing it to someting else tat assimilar ?ualities6 witout using te words li&e or as > "Longman Dictionary of

Contemporary English)=A figure of speec in wic a word or prase tat ordinarily designates one

ting is used to designate anoter6 tus ma&ing an implicit comparison8 "Themerican !eritage Dictionary of English$.

=a. te application of a name or descripti4e term or prase to an ob7ect or actionto wic it is imaginati4ely but not literally applicable. b an instance of tis> " Concise"#ford Dictionary$.

=A figure of speec in wic a name or descripti4e word or prase is transferredto an ob7ect or action different from6 but analogous to6 tat to wic it is literallyapplicable; an instance of tis6 a metaporical e!pression> "$horter "#ford English

Dictionary$.

5rom a translation point of 4iew6 metapors migt be defined as =imaginati4e

tougt processes


19/22

#toc& metapors are te re4erse of plain spea&ing about any contro4ersial sub7ect or

wate4er is taboo in a particular culture. Tey cluster around deat6 se!6 e!cretion6

war and unemployment; tey are te ardiest means of disguising te trut or pysical

facts. Terefore6 stoc& metapors are more culture bound> "Peter Newmar&6 : $.

Te problem caused by wit tis type of metapor in translation is tat te translator

is tempted to reproduce a T( metapor wic is totally unnatural. 5or e!ample6 it

would be absurd to translate as . Tis is wy6 according to Peter Newmar& "

: $ te reproduction of stoc& metapors sould be confined to one word metapors as

tey rarely cause suc a problem6. An e!ample is 8a sea of troubles86 wic can be

translated as }Y q FO.

,ecause original metapors are particularly fre?uent in literary te!ts6 tey are

especially rele4ant to students of te arts. An original metapor6 as Peter Newmar&

"


20/22

=a group of words wit a meaning of its own tat is different from te meaningsof eac separate word put togeter> "Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)

=A speec form or an e!pression of a gi4en language tat is peculiar to itselfgrammatically or cannot be understood from te indi4idual meanings of its elements>"The merican !eritage Dictionary)%

=a form of e!pression6 grammatical construction6 prase6 etc. peculiar to aperson or language; a prase6 etc. wic is understood by spea&ers of a particularlanguage despite its meanings not being predictable from tat of te separate words>"The $horter "#ford English Dictionary$.

=a group of words wose meaning cannot be predicted from te meanings of teconstituent words> "Collins$

8an e!pression wose meanings cannot be inferred from te meanings of tewords tat ma&e it up8 "WordWeb Thesaurus$.

5rom a translators point of 4iew6 Peter Newmar& "'@\\v: $ defines it as

="cec&$ a group of words wose meaning cannot be predicted from te meanings ofteir constituent words>. #imilarly6 )ona ,a&er " : $ states ="cec&$ Idioms are

fro^en patterns of language wic allow little or no 4ariation in form6 often carry

meanings wic cannot be deduced from teir indi4idual constituents>. Duff6

interestingly6 " : $ specifies tat =Idioms are cultural products carrying #( cultural

colouring>. Tis empasis on te culture specificity of idioms is wat 7ustifies teir

inclusion witin te cultural problems of translation.

As we can see from te pre4ious definitions6 an idiom as te following

caracteristics:

consists of more tan one word6 and is usually an e!pression or prasal 4erb6

te meaning of te idiom is not deducible from te meanings of te indi4idual

words6

idioms raise more problems for nonnati4e spea&ers.

Terefore6 An idiomis an e!pression "prase or clause$ wose meaning cannot

be deri4ed from te sum of te meanings of its parts. In oter words6 te meaning of

an idiom cannot be inferred from te meanings of te words tat ma&e it up.

#ometing te pre4ious definitions do not tal& about is te relationsip between

idioms and metapors6 wic are discussed in te pre4ious section. An idiom may

in4ol4e a metapor as in 9its raining cats and dogs or 9see te ligt6 but may also

in4ol4e prasal 4erbs as in 9loo& into "in4estigate scientifically$ and oter fi!ed

e!pressions as in 9nice and cold "` nice because cold$6

As to te problems triggered by idioms6 I sall focus on two suc problems. Te

first one is tat some idioms a4e a double meaning: a literal and a figurati4e one.


21/22

)ona ,a&er " : $ pro4ides te following e!ample: =to ta&e someone for a ride> may

be interpreted eiter as offering someone a ride or decei4ing im. Te point is tat te

translator may miss te figurati4e meaning of an idiom and conse?uently miss te real

message. Te second problem is tat some idioms may a4e seemingly identical ones

in te T(6 but te similarity may be only on te le4el of form wereas teir respecti4e

meanings may be different. " : $ pro4ides te following e!ample. =To pull

someones leg>6 wic means in Englis 9to &id6 to tell somebody false information

for fun is said to be identical on te surface le4el wit an Arabic idiom6 namely

9yisab ri7lu "to pull is leg$6 wic is found in some dialects of Arabic. Te point is

tat te latter idiom means someting different6 in particular it means 9is to tric&

somebody into tal&ing about someting e would rater a4e &ept secret " 6 :

$. Alternati4ely6 idioms in different languages6 wic a4e different forms may a4e

te same meaning. 5or e!ample6 .

All in all cultural problems fall into tree categories "owell . A^ia and ). #.

(ataiwis "'@@@2: ''$: geograpical6 religious and social. As an e!ample of

geograpical differences between te #ource and te Target %ultures we a4e already

discussed te possible problems tat #a&espeares sonnet in wic e says =#all I

compare tee to a #ummers day> migt raise to te student of translation in nit \.

Te e!ample abo4e is also representati4e of te problems of te translation of

metapors. 1e a4e also touced upon te role played by religion in saping culture

and attitudes in our distinction between denotati4e and connotati4e meanings. As to

social aspects of culture it is enoug to point out te differences of customs6 beliefs

and abits in te two cultures6 of wic marriages6 funerals and festi4als are

manifestations. In te Arab culture6 for instance6 people usually li4e in a large family

wit teir parents6 wic by itself may be an unusual notion to a westerner. #imilarly6an owl is a sign of wisdom in te European culture but it is a bad omen in te Arab

culture. ter aspects of culture may relate to articles of dress6 food6 taste and

dwelling. Tus te translator is not only re?uired to master te two languages but also

to be fully aware of te differences between te two cultures beind te languages and

ma&e te appropriate coices or pro4ide e!planations for te benefit of te T( reader.

ultural Problems !arriers in Translation: 3urther -eading

,oo&s


22/22

(ado6 3.6 '@/. (inguistics across %ultures6 pp. '''22 "*ow to %ompare two%ultures$ )ounin6 '@0-. '@0-6 (es Problmes T_ori?ues de la Traduction. %. 6 /6 '2"language and culture$ %atford6 [. %.6 '@0/. A (inguistic Teory of Translation. %. '

#teiner6 +eorge6 '@/. After ,abel: Aspects of (anguage and %ulture. (ondon:!ford ni4ersity Press "% 0. typologies of %ulture$ ,assnett)c+uire6 #usan '@\. Translation #tudies. pp. '-' "language andculture$6 pp. --' "loss and gain$ Duff6 '@\'6 Te Tird (anguage. %. '.0 "cultural differences and translation$ Newmar&6 '@\'. Approaces to Translation %. 2 6 pp. 22 "cultural e?ui4alence$6%. - and / "communicati4e and semantic translation$ *atim6 ,asil and Ian )ason6 '@@. Discourse and te Translator. (ongman6 %. 26esp. pp. -2-- "sociocultural conte!t$6 p. '0@ "semiotic6 communicati4e and

pragmatic dimension of conte!t$ Altwai7ri6 Abdula^i^ tman6 '@@\. Te Arab %ulture and ter %ultures6 pp. @

"Introduction about culture$ owell6 . A^i^ and )ufta #. (ataiwis6 '@@@Z 2. Principles of Translation. DarAnnada Alarabiya6 n.p.6 pp. '0'@ "language 6 culture and translation$6 pp. '@'''"relati4ity and culture$6 pp. ''''22 "cultural problems of EnglisxArabic translation:geograpical culture6 religious culture6 social culture6 material lo4e6 linguistic culture$

Encyclopedias

ArticlesTomas6 [enny6 . =%ross%ultural Pragmatic 5ailure>. (inguisticsv6 Sol. '6 No 26

pp. @'''2"politeness6 taboos6 $

1eb pages"%ultural Implications for translation: ttp:ZZaccurapid.comZ$"%ultural Elements in Translation: te Indian Perspecti4e:ttp:ZZwww.translationdirectory.comZ

#ee also (inguistic and %ultural Problems in Translation file#ee also TranslationanIntroductionand,ibliograpy file
http://accurapid.com/http://www.translationdirectory.com/http://accurapid.com/http://www.translationdirectory.com/

A Checklist of Linguistic and Cultural Problems in Translation

Documents

Transcript of A Checklist of Linguistic and Cultural Problems in Translation