The author allows himself to use the emotionally-painted words and phrases. For example, the phrases like “proper English” or “low people” are the reflection of the author's attitude to the issue discussed in the article. However, the prevalence of the author's personal opinion and overemphasis of the author's idea might be seen as a weakness of the writing as far as the readers might not find out on what the writer bases his claims. Thus, the audience might consider the support provided by the author not sufficient for the persuasion. Besides, Oliver Kamm strongly refers in the article to the ethical side of the problem of grammar pedantry, which might not be supported by his opponents.
Therefore, some translations will do a thought-for-thought transliteration into the idea of English, not the words. In this case, some of the technical details will be sacrificed for a clearer understanding of the original text. Others, however, may do a more literal translation and the meaning may be lost unless you are familiar with the cultural specifics of certain phrases. Various translations fall along this later spectrum, going from wooden literal translations to paraphrasing. Let us use Romans 12:20 as an example of how the different translations philosophies work.
However, there are also some points that I do not agree with Venuti. Venuti describes invisibility as “the translator’s situation and activity in contemporary Anglo-American culture”. He points out to two ways that the invisibility is being produced; translators themselves may translate “fluently” into English giving the appearance that the text is not in fact a translation, but the original or translated texts may be read and evaluated in the target culture as if they were the original. So, according to Venuti, the more fluent and transparent the text, the more invisible the translator is since people who read the target text will think that it is an original text written by the source text author, instead of a translation produced by a translator. If they are not aware that they are reading a translation, how can they be aware of the presence of a translator?
The Whorf hypothesis highlights how the cognition concepts are shaped by language and thinking is limited if one does not know certain word for that specific language, their understanding for that matter will be hard and may be differ from the actual meaning that has been presented (Fantini, 2010). It is impossible for one to think outside of their language as it necessitates how one thinks and they are bound with the language. This subject matter can be relate with the uses of word in forming a sentence or it can be called as morphology. People have to know the meaning of the word they used in other to send the message with the actual meaning towards someone. If the words used are not bringing the exact meaning as from what the person wants to say, it might lead to the misinterpretation from the one who receives the message and the way the message receiver understanding will differ from what he or she should
Moreover, resolution of such problems is a pre-requisite for generating good translation in target language. Divergences occur at different levels and severely affect the quality of a translation. The underlying principles for divergences are attributed to those cases where the basic concept of a sentence in the source language is expressed and distributed over different words or a series of different words in the target language (Dash 2004). As a language-dependent phenomenon, divergence may affect quality of a translation and reduce authenticity of a translated
He thinks that there is no full equivalence between any two languages because the translator is making use of synonyms and we cannot rely on them to be identical. He defines translation as being two equivalent messages with two different codes. Vinay and Darbelnet (1995) agree with him on the insufficient outcome of relying solely on the linguistic approach of translation. They state that translation involves the same situation but with different words. Jakobson with the other two theorists mentioned above think that translation is not impossible because there are different methods that the translator can choose from in order to
Thus, the translator follows using the grammatical and cultural features of the ST. It would be more or less literal translation. For intense, It is not consistent with the principle of etiquette, the hierarchy of authority, the good rule of prince. Also, a fundamental issue in translation Arabic classical literature is the issue of time and place. For example, the معلقة لبيد, it seems that is hard to create the same effect on the TL audience and foremost to the native.
Although the sentences are the same, the two sentences mean completely different things because of the question mark and full stop. If punctuation is taken for granted then the message that was intended to transmitted to the ready will not serve its purpose. (C) Correct Grammar and spelling Grammar is the way in which words are put together to form a proper sentence therefore if not done correctly grammar might lead to poor communication. Correct spelling is an important part of literacy and English spelling can cause difficulties for both the native and non-native speakers of English, it is therefore important that both grammar and spellings are correct as this could lead to poor first impressions as well as lead to poor communication. (D) Precise
PROBLEM 1: VOWEL UNDERDIFFERENTIATION [ʊ], [uː] A very common problem for Spanish speakers is the correct production of minimal pairs of vowels in English. This segmental problem is sometimes derived from the learners’ wrong perception of the sound due Spanish vowel [u]. In contrast, the Spanish vocalic system is significantly different from the English one. It is considered a negative transfer and might influence vowels production. The vowels underdifferentiation especially appears when differentiating between long and short vowels.
What is implied is that translation is commensurate with a literal interpretation of means of one language, whether written or spoken one. Thus, it is perceived as more mechanic rather than the creative process. So, how difficult can it be? However, there are those who do not agree with this. It is generally known that meanings of some words depend on the context, and often some words do not have their equivalents in the other languages or even