Hence, the translator will try to achieve the same function in the TT even though, it may appear unfaithful to the ST. The idea of a good translation relates to an idea of fluency in the TT or a way to make the target text acceptable. In line with this, Hatim and Mason explain translating as "an act of communication which attempts to relay, across cultural and linguistic boundaries, another act of communication (which may have been intended for different purposes and different readers/hearers)"(2005:1). That so, the translator needs to study all the linguistic and cultural parts involved in translating in order to achieve a new text from the source language, that the TT readers can understand and relate to in their own cultural context. This agrees with the concept of "dynamic" and "equivalent effect” developed by Eugene Nida.
The content is just one of the elements that determine the shape or form and are to be evaluated from this perspective.Theway of using language in the formalist point of view is different from using language by other approaches.The artistthat has a common language is trying not to be obsessed with conceptual limitations. The views of formalists are: 1) Departure or deviation from the norm: Formalists believed that standard literary languagedeviates from literary arts. Less text can be found in each paragraph or even a sentencethat somehow escape from the criteria. 2.Exotic and Defamiliarization: An important achievement in the theory of Defamiliarization is pure literature. Art puts obstacles in the way of reader to oblige him to think about the text and art.
Analyzing Evaluating Translation Quality Models and Macbeth Translated by Dariush Ahoori. Jahandar Borzoei Jahandar.email@example.com Abstract This paper aims to analyze a very important issue in the world of translation called evaluation of translation quality. Actually, many critics commented on translation evaluation and criticized its subjectivity. Even some of those critics refer to it as “relative”. As there are different translation models, it goes without saying that translated works are based on the theories that such models have been theorized upon so the translated works are reflections of such underlying theories.
So what makes the difference is the interest of the reader or the learner; he would be more interested to read the literary texts and so the language concepts would get into his mind very easily rather than filling in the blanks. This study of learning a language through literature is dealt in Sidney Sheldon’s Are You Afraid of Darkness? (2004). Introduction Language is an art or skill which can only be learnt through practice. The basic purpose of learning any language is to communicate in that particular language to its native speakers.
Reader response criticism is a literary critical theory. It is promoted and developed by a variety of literary theorists and critics. Depending on the person advancing the concept, the theory may take on any number of nuanced meanings. Generally speaking however, reader response criticism suggests that a text gains meaning by the purposeful act of a reader’s reading and interpreting it. The relationship between reader and text is highly valued; text does not exist without a reader.
“Foreignizing translation signifies the differences of the foreign text, yet only by disrupting the codes that prevail in the translating language” (Venuti 2008: 15). When Venuti speaks of “good translation” as one that has contains foreignization, this makes it clear the disruption which is implied in foreignisation is not simply a viable strategy, but also the desirable one. Domestication and foreignization are described by Venuti as ethical points of view to translation. The ethical side of foreignization is the particular translation’s relationship with the source culture, the target culture and its reader. When it comes to the source culture, Venuti perceives translation as a violent process because the translator must always “eliminate” and “disarrange” the source language text.
For the beauty, Lin Yutang believes that translation can not only be translated to read, but also must look beautiful. For example, the sentence “大中见小，小中见大，虚中有时，实中有虚，或藏或露，或深或浅”. He transited it into “show the small in the big, and the big in the small, and provide for the real in the unreal and for the unreal in the real. One reveals and conceals alternately, making it sometimes apparent and sometimes hidden.” He chose different verbs to translate the sentence, such as show, provide and reveal. It doesn 't seem repetitive and lengthy.
Their writings state that there is a clear connection between language and thought. For Sapir, the individual is not entirely aware of this connection and is subject to it without any choice whereas for Whorf, this connection between and language was also not a choice for the individuals but a compulsion. Both, Sapir and Whorf, believed that it is our culture that dictates our language, which in turn influences our thoughts and perceptions about the world and the things we experience in it. In simple words, linguistic relativity, sometimes called Whorfianism, states that the
But on the other side there still remains the basic fact that without quantitative confirmation, statements on style lack the support of concrete evidence. Statistical analysis, therefore, becomes an essential and important tool in stylistic description. Style therefore consists of the choices that the writer makes from the repertoire of language; it basically falls in the domain of language use; for instance what choices are made by a particular writer in a particular text. In literature it is possible to distinguish between what the writer chooses to talk about and how he chooses to talk about it. The literary communication in literature is done through carefully selected diction.
Likewise, in the verse by Mahmmud Gami the music created by the repetition of the initial (m) sound found in the words mari, mande and madanwaro is tough to maintain while rendering the verse into English. It is in wake of the above mentioned difficulties faced by the translators that we find different theories put forward to tackle them. There are three major names in the theory of translation namely, J.C. Catford, Eugene A. Nida and Peter Newmark. Catford (b. 1917) in his A Linguistic Theory of Translation (1965), defines translation as the substitution of source language text material by an comparable target language material.