I. LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Translation is a means of interlingual communication. The translator makes possible an exchange of information between the users of different languages by producing in the target language (TL or the translating language) a text, which has an identical communicative value with the source (or original) text (ST). This target text (TT that is the translation) is not fully identical with ST as to its form or content due to the limitations imposed by the formal and semantic differences between the source language (SL) and TL. Nevertheless, the users of TT identify it, to all intents and purposes, with ST - functionally, structurally and semantically. The functional identification is revealed in the fact that the users (or the translation receptors — TR) handle TT in such a way as if it were ST, a creation of the source text author. The translation is published, quoted, criticized, etc. as if it really belonged to the foreign Source. A Britisher may find in his paper the phrase «The French President made the following statement yesterday» and then read the statement in quotation marks. He is sure that he has read what the French President really said, which is certainly not true to fact since the President spoke French and what is cited in the paper is not the original text but something different: an English text produced by some obscure translator who blandly passes his statement for the French statesman's.

Translation — an incredibly broad notion, which can be understood in many different ways. For example, one may talk of translation as a process or a product, and identify such sub-types as literary translation, technical translation, subtitling and machine translation; moreover, while more typically it just refers to the transfer of written texts, the term sometimes also includes interpreting.

This definition introduces further variables, first the «sub-types», which include not only typically written products such as literary and technical translations, but also translation forms that have been created in recent decades, such as audiovisual translation, a written product which is read in conjunction with an image on screen, cinema, TV, DVD, computer game). Moreover, the reference to machine translation reveals that translation is now no longer the preserve of human translators, but in a professional context, increasingly a process and product that marries computing power and the computerized analysis of language to the human's ability to analysis sense and determine appropriate forms in the other language.

Sometimes we can express the confusion of translation with interpreting, which is strictly speaking «oral translation of a spoken message or text». Yet this confusion is seen repeatedly in everyday non-technical language use.

As any observable phenomenon, translation can be the object of scientific study aimed at understanding its nature, its components and their interaction as well as various factors influencing it or linked with it in a meaningful way. The science of translation or translatology is concerned both with theoretical and applied aspects of translation studies. A theoretical description of the translation phenomenon is the task of the theory of translation. Theoretical research is to discover what translation is, to find out what objective factors underlie the translator's intuition, to describe the ways and methods by which the identity of the communicative value of ST and TT is achieved. The objective knowledge obtained can then be used to help the translator to improve his performance as well as to train future translators.

The theory of translation provides the translator with the appropriate tools of analysis and synthesis, makes him aware of what he is to look for in the original text, what type of information he must convey in TT and how he should act to achieve his goal. In the final analysis, however, his trade remains an art. For science gives the translator the tools, but it takes brains, intuition and talent to handle the tools with great proficiency. Translation is a complicated phenomenon involving linguistic, psychological, cultural, literary, ergonomical and other factors. Different aspects of translation can be studied with the methods of the respective sciences. Up to date most of theoretical research of translation has been done within the framework of linguistics. The linguistic theory of translation is concerned with translation as a form of speech communication establishing contact between communicants who speak different languages. The basis of this theory is linguistics in the broadest sense of the word, that is, macrolinguistics with all its new branches, such as psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, text linguistics, communicative linguistics, etc., studying the language structure and its functioning in speech in their relationship to mind, culture and society. Language, which makes possible communication between people, is part of all human activities, of life itself.

The general theory of translation describes the basic principles which bold good for each and every translation event. In each particular case, however, the translating process is influenced both by the common basic factors and by a number of specific variables which stem from the actual conditions and modes of the translator's work: the type of original texts he has to cope with, the form in which ST is presented to him and the form in which he is supposed to submit his translation, the specific requirements he may be called upon to meet in his work, etc.

Contemporary translation activities are characterized by a great variety of types, forms and levels of responsibility. The translator has to deal with works of the great authors of the past and of the leading authors of today, with intricacies of science fiction and the accepted stereotypes of detective stories. He must be able to cope with the elegancy of expression of the best masters of literary style and with the tricks and formalistic experiments of modern avant-gardists. The translator has to preserve and fit into a different linguistic and social context a gamut of shades of meaning and stylistic nuances expressed in the original text by a great variety of language devices: neutral and emotional words, archaic words and new coinages, metaphors and similes, foreign borrowings, dialectal, jargon and slang expressions, stilted phrases and obscenities, proverbs and quotations, illiterate or inaccurate speech, and so on and so forth.

The original text may deal with any subject from general philosophical principles or postulates to minute technicalities in some obscure field of human endeavour. The translator has to tackle complicated specialized descriptions and reports on new discoveries in science or technology for which appropriate terms have not yet been invented. His duty is to translate diplomatic representations and policy statements, scientific dissertations and brilliant satires, maintenance instructions and after-dinner speeches, etc.

Translating a play the translator must bear in mind the requirements of theatrical presentation, and dubbing a film he must see to it that his translation fits the movement of the speakers' lips. The translator may be called upon to make his translation in the shortest possible time, while taking a meal or against the background noise of loud voices or rattling type-writers.

In simultaneous interpretation the translator is expected to keep pace with the fastest speakers, to understand all kinds of foreign accents and defective pronunciation, to guess what the speaker meant to say but failed to express due to his inadequate proficiency in the language he speaks.

In consecutive interpretation he is expected to listen to long speeches, taking the necessary notes, and then to produce his translation in full or compressed form, giving all the details or only the main ideas.

In some cases the users will be satisfied even with the most general idea of the meaning of the original, in other cases the translator may be taken to task for the slightest omission or minor error.

Each type of translation has its own combination of factors influencing the translating process. The general theory of translation should be supplemented by a number of special translation theories identifying major types of translation activities and describing the predominant features of each type.

Another important branch of the theory of translation is concerned with the study of ST and TT units which can replace each other in the translating process. The creation of equivalent texts results in, and in part is dependent on, the equivalence of correlated language units in the two texts. In any two languages there are pairs of units which are of identical or similar communicative value and can replace each other in translation. The communicative value of a language element depends both on its own semantics and on the way it is used in speech. Therefore translation equivalence may be established between units occupying dissimilar places in the system of respective languages. It follows that equivalent units cannot be discovered with confidence before a certain amount of TT's have been compared with their ST's. It is obvious that a description of translation equivalents, as opposed to the methods of the general theory of translation, should be bilingual, that is, it should always relate to a definite pair of languages. Moreover, a bilingual theory of translation should study two separate sets of equivalents, with either language considered, in turn, as SL and the other as TL. Nevertheless all bilingual theories of translation proceed from the identical basic assumptions as to the classification of equivalents and their role in the translating process.

In his work «On Linguistic Aspects of Translation» the Russo-American linguist Roman Jakobson makes a very important distinction between three types of written translation:

• intralingual translation — translation within the same language , which can involve rewarding or paraphrase;
• interlingual translation — translation from one language to another, and
• intersemiotic translation — translation of the verbal sign by a non-verbal sign, for example music or image.

Only by the second category, interlingual translation is deemed «translation proper» by Jakobson.

Translation between written languages remains today the core of translation research, but the focus has broadened far beyond the mere replacement of SL linguistic items with their TL equivalents. In the intervening years research has been undertaken into all types of linguistic, cultural and ideological phenomena around translation Where do we draw the line between «translation» and «adaptation»? In 1996 in Britain was published the biography of French writer Albert Camus. The English edition fully omits one third of the French original. Yet omission, decided upon by the publisher, does not negate the translation. And then there is the political context of translation and language, visible on a basic level whenever we see a bilingual sign in the street or whenever a linguistic group asserts (утверждать, заявлять) its identity by graffiting over the language of the political majority.

Developments have seen a certain blurring of research between the different types of translation too. Thus, research into audiovisual translation now encompasses sign language, intralingual subtitles. The image-word relationship is crucial in both film and advertising, and there has been closer investigation of the links between translation, music and dance. In view of this complex situation we shall restrict mostly to forms of written translation, including some subtitling and advertising, but excluding interpreting. It will also include translation into the second language, which does often take place in the context of both language learning and the translation profession, despite the general wisdom that the translator should always translate into his or her mother tongue or «language of habitual use».

The definition of the ambit translation will be:

• The process of transferring a written text from SL to TL, conducted by a translator in a specific socio-cultural context.
• The written product or TT (target text), which results from that process and which functions in socio-cultural context of the TL.
• The cognitive, linguistic, visual, cultural and ideological phenomena, which are an integral part of the variants below.

Nor is it necessary to look so far beyond Europe for examples of this kind of differentiation. The large number of terms in Finnish for variations of snow, in Arabic for aspects of camel behavior, in English for light and water, in French for types of bread, all present the translator with, on one level, a big problem. Bible translators have documented the additional difficulties involved in the concept of Trinity or the social significance of the parables in certain cultures. In addition to the lexical problems, there are of course languages that do not have tense systems or concepts of time that in any way correspond to Indo-European systems.

Jakobson's discussion on translation centres around certain key questions of linguistics, including equivalence between items in SL and TL and the notion of translatability. These are issues which became central to research in translation in the 1960s and 1970s. This field received the name «Translation Studies» thanks to the Netherlands-based scholar James S. Holmes in his paper «The Name and Nature of Translation Studies» presented in 1972. He mapped out the new field like a science, dividing it into 'pure' Translation Studies (theory) and 'applied' studies (translator training, translator aids). According to him, Translation Studies should:

• describe the phenomena of translating and translations as they manifest themselves in the world of our experience;
• establish general principles by means of which these phenomena can be explained and predicted.

Here Holmes uses «translating» for the process and «translation» for the product. The descriptions and generalized principles were much reinforced by Gideon Toury in his Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond where two tentative general laws of translation are proposed:

1. The law of growing standardization — TTs generally display less linguistic variation than STs;
2. The law of interference — common ST lexical and syntactic patterns tend to be copied, creating unusual patterns in TT.

Although references are still to be found to the new or 'emerging' discipline, since Holmes's paper, Translation Studies has evolved to such an extent that it is really a perfect interdiscipline, interfacing with a whole host of other fields.

Discussion and research points

1. In the Hebrew translation of the same book, the translator chose to substitute the British with a traditional Jewish sweet, a kind of marshmallow. In what ways do you think this show similar reasoning to that behind the American version?
2. How far does it appear that translation studies has been accepted as a separate discipline or is it more an interdiscipline of another term?
3. What is translation? What is interlingual communication? How can it be demonstrated that TT has an identical communicative value with ST? In what respect do the TT users identify it with ST?
4. What is the practice of translation? What is the art of translation? What is translatology? What is the aim of the theory of translation? In what way can the theory of translation be useful to the translator?
5. What aspects of translation may be the object of study of different sciences? Which science plays a leading role in translation studies today? How can linguistic research be classified? What kind of linguistics can be the basis of the theory of translation?
6. What is the field of the general theory of translation? What common properties of all languages make translation possible? Can two texts in different languages be absolutely identical semantically? What is translation equivalence?
7. In what way do translation events differ from one another? Does the translating process depend on the type of the source text? In what form can a translation be made? What are special theories of translation concerned with?
8. Are the relationships of equivalence established only between ST and TT as a whole or also between correlated language units in these texts? What is a translation equivalent? Should translation equivalents be studied on a bilingual or a multilingual basis?
9. What is the translating process? Is the translating process directly observable? Can the result of the translating process (TT) give some information about the process itself? What is the practical aspect of studying the translating process?

II. POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND THE TRANSLATION

In the last few decades, the role of the translator (or interpreter) has changed dramatically. From the simple mediating, anonymous activity of the past, to the highly sophisticated, highly technologized, highly knowledgeable wizard of today the translator has travelled a very long and complicated road. But throughout the history of this profession, one thing has never changed: the translator has constantly acted as a mediator between cultures. Nowadays, this mediating role grows in significance, mainly due to the fact that sharing cultural information acts as a major incentive for communication and cooperation. In a growingly globalized society, knowing more about others, from a cultural point of view, has become essential. The European businessman aiming for success in Muslim or Hindu countries, for instance, must first get acquainted to specific local requirements and taboos; similarly, the European translator who aims at widespread acknowledgement must first learn about cultural differences, before making them known — and understood — by his or her readers. He (or she) must identify with the source text culture and find the right balance between the accurate shift into the target language and a degree of acceptability that would determine a rapid adoption of the translated text into the target culture. The modern world preserves the cultural wounds of the past. The clash between races and religions has made it clear that a solution must be found - and soon. The work of politicians is no longer enough — so linguists have found it their duty to join in this communication effort. The concept of "political correctness", initially used by the American legal system in the late 1700s, has slowly turned into a global linguistic effort meant to promote more tolerant human relationships. The concept was quickly adopted by many cultures, through the calque method, possibly because it sounded right and seemed to involve politics as well; nevertheless, in many languages the resulting term fails to convince. In linguistic terms, being politically correct generally means preserving a moderate attitude and the due respect in matters regarding genre, religion or race — that is, speaking or writing without hurting other people's feelings. But the initial admirable efforts later turned to exaggerations, sometimes embarrassing, if not even ridiculous.

Irrespective of how ridiculous this topic may seem in theory, the problem of translating such terms from English is a very serious one. Most such terms have a deep cultural connotation, thus making it even more difficult to choose, in the target language, the "right words" or euphemisms to express the same meaning as in the source language.

Difficulties in translating «politically correct» and sensitive terms from English. In order to be appropriate, any translation must follow certain rules and theoretical requirements and, apart from certain innate qualities (the ability of learning foreign languages, of making quick shifts from a source language into a target language, of intuitively choosing the best from a number of possible variants), the translator must also master a theoretical frame that is sure to assist a work well done. In what "politically correct" terms are concerned, two major theoretical topics could represent the basis for the present paper: Gideon Toury's comments on the choice between accuracy and acceptability adapted to the translation requirements of any «sensitive text, and Pinker's opinions about what he calls the «euphemism treadmill». Toury's research is focused mainly on Bible translations, but the idea that a translation should not simply follow the line of accuracy, but also conform to the cultural specificity of the target language, in order to be accepted by target readers, has given rise to a heated debate as well as to a number of critical opinions. Nida's famous comment on the biblical story of «Jesus walking on water» (which, according to this rule, would risk being translated into «walking on sand» or «on a swamp» in geographical areas where «water» is scarce) is only an example. Acceptability is a strong criterion in a religious context; therefore, a «politically correct» translation of such a text should be in conformity with the cultural rules of the target cultural space.

However, in the case of translations, the chosen equivalent cannot move away from the initial meaning of the respective word or expression in the source language variant, leading to misinterpretations or inaccurate rendering of the core meaning. A translation aiming to be adequate in the context of the target culture is focusing on the ultimate goal (gaining the approval of readers). Also, certain target languages may not include enough synonyms or variants for a chain of terms expressing the same concept at different stages of its evolution (e.g. the successive terms referring, in American English, to people belonging to the now called Afro-American community). The topic of successive terms denominating the same category, being replaced in turn, due to the fact that the usage of those words in certain contexts may fill them, one by one, with a negative connotation was largely treated by the Canadian experimental psychologist Steven C. Pinker who called this development a «euphemism treadmill». Furthermore, Pinker refers to some of the deeper reasons for the change of attitude against certain words — especially as seen in a context: «Most words and parts of words have many meanings, and when we listen to someone speak, our brains have to find the right ones».

Both translation theory and common sense will agree that a good translation must rely on thorough cultural background knowledge on the part of the translator. Performance is never enough if it is not doubled by a detailed research on the general topic, as well as by an unbiased attitude towards «sensitive» topics. The most significant difficulty, in what politically correct terms are concerned, is the fact that they seem to grow in number by the day, and translators possibly regret the absence of relevant dictionaries, although these would probably be subject to endless add-ups and changes. In English, several topics arguably require constant updating to keep up the pace with public attitude: gender, religion (and the festivals and celebrations related to it), social status (including names of professions) and disabilities of any kind. Racial issues stepped further back from the limelight once the reference to geographical specificity (Afro-American, Asian American, and Native American, people of colour, indigenous people) replaced the old pejorative words.

What should a translator do when faced with job names such as «transparent-wall maintenance officer», «sanitation engineer» or even «custodian» — that is, the current replacements for «window cleaner» or «janitor» respectively? Any previous knowledge on army and engineering matters or museum clerks can be of no help, and the translator must rely exclusively on his/her understanding of the context.

• custodial officer — prison guard
• sanitation man — garbage collector
• glass maintenance engineer — window cleaner
• fireman — firefighter
• postman — mail carrier

Bible interpreters hold it that the word of God must be preserved as such, without any misinterpretations - but what is to be done if the modern translator into English chooses to replace the word «man» (ignoring its alternative generalizing character) with «people», in examples such as «Man does not live by bread alone» (excerpt from Matthew 4.4, in the 1996 NIV Inclusive Language Edition). References such as AD or BC may well become inadequate in the near future, and they are sometimes replaced by «common era» (or CE) and «before common era» (BCE). True enough, we live among followers of other religions - but so far, nobody has thought of replacing the Hindu Diwali (a festival of lights), the Ramadan or the Hanukah with politically correct terms that would also satisfy Christians. In addition, the word «common» is often associated with the meaning of «average» or «ordinary» — both with a possibly derogatory connotation. Translation difficulties are more obvious in cases such as the chains of terms (euphuism treadmill) related to certain disabilities. Bibliographical references cite widely known examples such as: «lame — crippled — handicapped — disabled — physically challenged — with differing abilities» — an impressive number of variants that would pose a challenge even for the brightest of translators. Such a translation would surely use archaisms and the technique of compensation in order to cover for the existing white spots in the target language corpus. However, other difficulties may arise when some of the above words are used in completely different contexts. Connotation of a euphemism can also be subject-specific. The effects of globalization could have certain effects on the development of this specific topic, and many words as we know them today could cease to be used, for the same reason.

Pushing the limits of the morally accepted language becomes a problem for any translator. In many cases, changes of terminology do not cause changes at the level of mentality or social behavior; consequently, the deep causes of discrimination continue to exist. Although the role of the translator is not that of lobbying for moral issues, he/she can only abide by the rules, which govern the language in consonance with the society they live in at a certain moment in time. From the translator's point of view, this will continue to be a challenge in the effort to produce the best possible alternative of any source text.

In the previous decade, activists of the feminist movement made the first attempts to diminish differences between men and women in society. They criticized the existing language and culture as «male-dominated» and «patriarchal». The history of society, as the feminists argued, was written from the male point of view («it's HIStory, not HERstory»).

The English language was also considered to be full of male-dominating patterns. Utterances like Every teacher plans his lessons referred to teachers in general, and words with the stem «man» (e.g., mankind, chairman) were used to denote both sexes. Feminists criticized these items as sexist; all patterns referring to men only were called «sexist, old-fashioned language». Sexist language was opposed by «modern nonsexist or inclusive language» that suggested gender equality and neutrality. Inclusive language suggested avoiding the use of male pronouns in the cases when the gender of a person is unknown. Sexist language is a term that labels the use of male-dominated phrases suggesting that members of one sex are less able, intelligent, and skillful (the examples cited above); pejorative language is the use of words or phrases disapproving or suggesting that something is no good or of no importance (labeling nationalities, aged people, etc.); taboo language includes words or phrases which are likely to offend somebody—certain words referring to sex or sexual organs, excretion, and people's nationality or race can be particularly offensive. Avoiding these words and phrases means using politically correct language.

Discussion and research points

1. Terms used to disguise unpleasantness. In an attempt to mask the truth or to hide unpleasant realities, governments or other special interest groups sometimes create euphemisms or expressions to put a more positive light on a situation. If blind sounds offensive, substitute visually challenged. Sometimes, the new terms seem awkward, funny, or even offensive. Again, there is unlikely to be agreement on whether such terms are good or not. Consider this opinion from Dr. Kenneth Jernigan (1999), a leader for more than 40 years in the National Federation of the Blind in the United States: The blind have had trouble with euphemisms for as long as anybody can remember.... The form has changed (in fact, everything is very «politically correct»), but the old notions of inferiority and second-class status remain. The euphemisms and the political correctness do not help. If anything, they make matters worse since they claim modern thought and new enlightenment. Jernigan (1999) quotes a resolution passed by the National Federation of the Blind that says that using politically correct euphemisms instead of «such straightforward, respectable words as blindness, blind, the blind, blind person, or blind persons.... implies shame instead of true equality, and portrays the blind as touchy and belligerent». Do you agree or disagree with Dr. Jernigan? Explain why.
2. Politically correct changes are also occurring in languages other than English as a reflection of growing tolerance, inclusion, and other changes in modern societies. What examples of politically correct speech can you identify in the native languages of your classmates or community? Create a list of examples.
3. PC point of view. Write the statements below on the blackboard. а) PC speech is an important issue in modern society and reflects a growing respect for others. b. PC speech is just a form of conformism and does not represent a meaningful change in attitudes. Which of the two points of view most closely reflects your opinions. Support your opinions by giving examples.
4. How do we distinguish the languages even not knowing them?
5. What would you definitely omit in leaflets, adverts or political speech?
6. Investigate what writing was produced on translation in your own languages and cultures before the twentieth century. How closely does it resemble the writings discussed in this chapter? Are there significant differences in early translation theory written in different languages?

III. TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE

Equivalence is the reproduction of a SL text by TL means. Equivalence is not a constant but a variable quantity and the range of variability is considerable. The degree of equivalence depends on the linguistic means used in the SL texts and on the functional style to which the text belongs.

In his paper «On linguistic aspects of translation», the Russian-born American structuralist Roman Jakobson describes three kinds of translation: intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic, with interlingual referring to translation between two different written languages. Jakobson goes on to examine key issues of this type of translation, notably linguistic meaning and equivalence.

Jakobson follows the relation set out by Saussure between the signifier (the spoken and written signal) and the signified (the concept signified). Together, the signifier and signified form the linguistic sign, but that sign is arbitrary or unmotivated. Thus, the English word cheese is the acoustic signifier which «denotes» the concept «food made of pressed curds» (the signified), although there is no inherent reason for that to be so. Jakobson stresses that it is possible to understand what is signified by a word even if we have never seen or experienced the concept or thing in real life. Examples he gives are ambrosia and nectar, words which modern readers will have read in Greek myths even if they have never come across the substances in real life; these contrast with cheese, which they almost certainly have encountered first hand.

Jakobson then moves on to consider the thorny problem of equivalence in meaning between words in different languages. He points out «there is ordinarily no full equivalence between code-units». He gives the example of cheese in English, which is not identical to the Russian syr (or, for that matter, the Spanish queso, the German Käse, etc.) since the Russian «code-unit» does not include the concept of cottage cheese. That would be tvarok and not syr in Russian. While one might quibble that the English cheese only really covers the realm of cottage cheese by the addition of the term cottage, the general principle of interlinguistic difference between terms and semantic fields is established.

In Jakobson's description, interlingual translation involves «substitut[ing] messages in one language not for separate code-units but for entire messages in some other language»: The translator recodes and transmits a message received from another source. Thus, translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes.

For Jakobson, cross-linguistic differences centre around obligatory grammatical and lexical forms: «Languages differ essentially in what they must convey and not in what they may convey». Examples of differences are easy to find. They occur at:

• the level of gender: e.g. house is feminine in Romance languages, neuter in German and English; honey is masculine in French, German and Italian, feminine in Spanish, neuter in English, etc.;
• the level of aspect: in Russian, the verb morphology varies according to whether the action has been completed or not;
• the level of semantic fields: e.g. the German Geschwister is normally explicated in English as brothers and sisters; and the English children in the statement 'I've got two children' is translated as the gender-specific hijas in Spanish if both children are female.

The old terms such as «literal», «free» and «faithful» translation, which were examined before, are discarded by Nida in favour of «two basic orientations» or types of : (1) formal equivalence and (2) dynamic equivalence.

These are defined by Nida as follows:

1. Formal equivalence: focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content . One is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language. Formal equivalence is thus keenly oriented towards the ST structure, which exerts strong influence in determining accuracy and correctness. Most typical of this kind of translation are 'gloss translations', with a close approximation to ST structure, often with scholarly footnotes, allowing the student (since this type of translation will often be used in an academic environment) to gain close access to the language and customs of the source culture.
2. Dynamic equivalence: is based on what Nida calls 'the principle of equivalent effect', where 'the relationship between receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message'. The message has to be tailored to the receptor's linguistic needs and cultural expectation and 'aims at complete naturalness of expression'. 'Naturalness' is a key requirement for Nida. Indeed, he defines the goal of dynamic equivalence as seeking 'the closest natural equivalent to the source-language message'. This receptor-oriented approach considers adaptations of grammar, of lexicon and of cultural references to be essential in order to achieve naturalness; the TT language should not show interference from the SL, and the 'foreignness' of the ST setting is minimized in a way that would now be criticized by later culturally oriented translation theorists.

For Nida, the success of the translation depends above all on achieving equivalent response. It is one of the «four basic requirements of a translation», which are:

1. making sense;
2. conveying the spirit and manner of the original;
3. having a natural and easy form of expression;
4. producing a similar response.

It is interesting to note the similarity with Tytler's principles of translation in one of the early attempts at systematizing translation theory at the end of the eighteenth century.

Although dynamic equivalence is aimed at, it is also a graded concept since Nida accepts that the 'conflict' between the traditional notions of content and form cannot always be easily resolved. As a general rule for such conflicts, Nida underlines that 'correspondence in meaning must have priority over correspondence in style' if equivalent effect is to be achieved.

Among the most prominent German scholars in the translation science field was also carried out by Werner Koller in Heidelberg and Bergen. In an attempt to answer this question, Koller goes on to describe five different types of equivalence:

1. Denotative equivalence is related to equivalence of the extralinguistic content of a text. Other literature, says Koller, calls this 'content invariance'.
2. Connotative equivalence is related to the lexical choices, especially between near-synonyms. Koller sees this type of equivalence as elsewhere being referred to as 'stylistic equivalence'.
3. Text-normative equivalence is related to text types, with different kinds of texts behaving in different ways.
4. Pragmatic equivalence, or 'communicative equivalence', is oriented towards the receiver of the text or message. This is Nida's 'dynamic equivalence'.
5. Formal equivalence, which is related to the form and aesthetics of the text, includes word plays and the individual stylistic features of the ST. It is elsewhere referred to as 'expressive equivalence' and is not to be confused with Nida's term.

Discussion and research points

1. Equivalence and the principle of equivalence are keystones of Nida's theory of translation. Research more deeply the arguments around the issues and how the concepts have developed over the years). Why do you consider there has been such heated debate? How can the concepts be used in translator training today?
2. What is translation equivalence? Is every translation equally close semantically to its ST? How can different types of equivalence be singled out? In what way does one type of equivalence differ from the other?
3. What is the minimum semantic similarity between ST and TT? How can the first type of translation equivalence be defined? What is the purport of communication? Should the purport of communication be always preserved in translation?
4. How can the second type of equivalence be characterized? In what way does it differ from the first type? How can a situation be described in the text? Do the methods used to describe the situation in ST and TT remain the same in the second type of equivalence? What is situational equivalence?
5. What parts of the ST contents are retained in the third type of equivalence? How can the identity of the methods of describing the situation be demonstrated in such cases? What semantic variations can be observed in translations of this type?
6. What is the role of the meaning of the language units which make up the text? What is the fourth type of equivalence? In what way can the meaning of the ST syntactical structures be preserved in translation?
7. How can the fifth type of equivalence be defined? What are the main components of the word semantics? Is the whole meaning of the word actualized when the word is used in the text? Can words of different languages be identical in their meaning?
8. What levels of equivalence can be distinguished in translation? How do the equivalence levels mirror the essential features of speech units?

IV. TRANSLATION OF LEXICAL UNITS

There are different types of correspondence between the elements of the SL and TL lexical units.

1. А word of SL and а word of TL may be identical in their meaning. Such words are called equivalents. To this group usually belong monosemantic words like:
   • proper names;
   • geographical names;
   • names of the month and the days of the week
   • numerals;
   • some scientific and technological terms;
   • names of the streets, hotels;
   • names of sports and games;
   • names of periodicals;
   • names of institutions and organizations.
2. The meaning of а SL word and а TL word may coincide partially. There are three variants within this type.
   • a) a word in one of the language may have more meanings than the corresponding word of the other language, so that the meaning of the latter is as it were included in the meaning of the former.
   • b) the second variant of semantic relations between partially corresponding words may be described as intersection. It means that both the words have some meaning in common, but at the same time each word has some other meanings, which do not coincide (fine skin, fine edge, fine arts).
   • c) the third variant of relations is more complicated. It is known that for the English it seems quite necessary to differentiate between а hand and an arm, while in Russian we usually do not feel it is so important and use only one word to denote both notions (also 'watch' and 'clock, 'mirror' and 'looking-glass'). On the other hand we usually differentiate between 'вишня' and 'черешня', while for the English there exists only one notion 'cherry', as well as both 'клубника' and 'земляника' are called 'strawberry'.
3. Finally in one of the languages there may exist words that have no correspondences in other language at all. They are usually proper names which are not used or even known in other countries (personal names such as Aubrey, Hope, etc), place names such as Hindley, Catmose, and the names of specifically national notions and phenomena (lobby, muffin, drugstore, самовар, щи, агитбригада, стройотряд).

They say that translation starts where dictionaries end. Dictionaries list all regular correspondences between elements of lexical systems of languages. Translation deals not so much with the system of language but with speech (or to be exact — with а text, which is а product of speech). Therefore, in the process of translating one has to find it by himself which of the meanings of polysemantic word is realized in а particular context, to see if under the influence of this context the word has acquired а slightly new shade of meaning and to decide how this new shade of meaning can be rendered in TL. Every language has its specific way of expressing things, а way that may be quite alien to other languages. To avoid all the clumsiness special devices worked out by the theory of translation and known as lexical transformations are used. There are several types of such transformations.

1. Concretization — The first type of lexical transformations is used in translating words with wide and non-differentiated meaning. The essence of this transformation lies in translating such words of SL by words with specified concrete meaning in TL. When translating from English into Russian they use it especially often in the sphere of verbs. If English verbs mostly denote actions in rather vague general way, Russian verbs are very concrete in denoting not only the action itself but also the manner of performing this action as well: (to go on foot, by train, by plane — идти пешком, ехать поездом, лететь самолетом; to get out — выбираться, вылезать, высаживаться).
2. Generalization — The second type of transformation is quite opposite in its character and is called 'generalization'. In many cases the norms of TL make it unnecessary or even undesirable to translate all the particulars expressed in SL. The English usually name the exact height of а person: He is six foot three tall. (190, 5 см) In Russian it would hardly seem natural to introduce а character saying Он шести футов и трех дюймов росту. Better say Он высокого роста. The necessity to generalize may be caused by purely pragmatic reasons. In the original text, there may be proper names informative for the native speakers of SL and uninformative for the readers in TL. They may be the names of some firms, goods, shops and others. The English know the name Tonibell — the name of ice-cream produced by the firm Tonibell. Trebor — means sweets produced by Trebor Sharps LTD; Tree Top — fruit drinks, transcribed in the Russian these names are absolutely senseless for the reader.
3. Antonymic translation — The third type of transformation is based on antonymy. It means that a certain word is translated not by the corresponding word of TL but by its antonym and at the same time negation is added (or, if there is negation in the original sentence, it is omitted in translation). It was not too far — Это оказалось довольно близко. The necessity for this transformation arises due to several reasons:
   • Peculiarities of the systems of SL and TL — in Russian the negative prefix не coincides in its form with the negative particle не, while in English they differ (un, in, im and the negative suffix --less and the particle 'not' on the other hand), so it's quite normal to say 'not impossible' in English, while in Russian 'не невозможно' is bad.
   • Contextual requirements — 'А murder is only safe when he is in prison' — 'Убийца не опасен, только когда он в тюрьме'. The word 'safe' taken separately is translated as 'безопасный', but in this context the variant 'не опасен' is preferable.
   • Traditional norms of TL — is necessary for the purpose of observing the traditional norms of TL: 'І only wish І could. І wish І had the time.' — 'Мне очень жаль, что я не могу. К сожалению, у меня нет времени.'
4. Semantic development — The fourth type is based upon logical connection between two phenomena (it is а cause-and-effect type of connection), one of which is named in the original text and the other is used as its translated version. This transformation presupposes semantic and logical analysis of the situation described in the text and consists in semantic development of this situation (in Russian it is called смысловое развитие). If the situation is developed correctly, that is if the original and translated utterances are semantically connected as cause and effect, the transformation helps to render the sense and to observe the norms of TL.

Discussion and research points

1. What are some of the procedural memories that already help you to translate? How did you acquire them? How do they work? Which ones don't work very well yet? How might they be improved?
2. Explore the difference between representational memory and procedural memory by consciously storing the meaning or translation of a new word in long-term memory: open a dictionary to a word that you have never seen before, study the entry, and commit it to memory. Wait a few minutes, and then «represent» it to yourself: review in your mind, or out loud, or on paper, what you have just learned. Now compare that memory with your «procedural» memory of how to get from home to school, or how to translate «how to get from home to school» into another language.
3. How can the translating process be studied and described? What is a model of translation? How can translation models be classified? What are the strong and the weak points of translation modelling?
4. What are the relationships between the contents of a text and extralinguistic realities? What is meant by the «situation»? How does the situational model describe the translating process?
5. What are the basic assumptions of the semantic-transformational model of translation? What types of transformations can be used in the translating process? Do all such transformations involve semantic shifts?
6. What transformations are oriented towards the form of the SL units? What is the difference between transcription and transliteration? How are transcription and transliteration used in the translating process? What are loan translations?
7. How are regular equivalents used in the translating process? What is context? What types of context influence the choice of an equivalent? What is an occasional equivalent?
8. What are equivalent-lacking words? What types of words have, as a rule, no regular equivalents? What are the principal ways of rendering the meaning of an equivalent-lacking word in translation?

V. TRANSLATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

Translation of phraseological Units — are usually classified into three big groups:

1. Phraseological fusions — non-motivated groups forming invisible wholes both semantically and syntactically. Their meaning in Modern English does not depend on the meaning of the component elements. They seldom, if ever, have equivalents in the S and T languages and are usually rendered by interpreting translation or by paraphrasing.
   • to go the whole hog — делать что-то основательно, идти на все;
   • once in a blue moon — very seldom;
   • to cry for the moon — to demand unreal;
   • under the rose — quietly.
   Sometimes-phraseological fusions are called idioms under which linguists understand a complete loss of the inner form. To explain the meaning of idioms is a complicated etymological problem (tit to tat means «to revenge», but no one can explain the meaning of the words tit and tat).
2. Phraseological unity — is a semantically indivisible phraseological unit the whole meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of its components. In general, phraseological unities are the phrases where the meaning of the whole unity is not the sum of the meanings of its components but is based upon them and may be understood from the components. The meaning of the significant word is not too remote from its ordinary meanings. This meaning is formed as a result of generalized figurative meaning of a free word-combination. It is the result of figurative metaphoric reconsideration of a word-combination.
   • To drop a brick — допуститъ бестактность, совершить промах;
   • monkey business — всякие штучки, глупости, дурачества;
   • to eat humble pie — проглотить обиду, смириться.
   Phraseological unities are characterized by the semantic duality. One cannot define for sure the semantic meaning of separately taken phraseological unities isolated from the context, because these word-combinations may be used as free in the direct meaning and as phraseological in the figurative meaning. According to the principle of their translation phraseological unities can be divided into three groups:
   • Phraseological unities having Russian counterparts, which have the same meaning expressed by a similar image. They can often be traced to the same source — biblical, mythological, Latin proverbs or sayings.
     • not all is gold that glitters — не все то золото, что блестит;
     • to cut the Gordian knot — разрубить Гордиев узел;
     • to cross the Rubicon — перейти Рубикон;
     • Promised Land — Земля Обетованная;
     • to cast the first stone — бросить первый камень;
     • to be or not to be — быть или не быть;
     • to be in the seventh heaven — быть на седьмом небе.
   • Target language equivalents possessing national colouring though expressing the same idea should be avoided as they cannot be considered true equivalents because they introduce alien associations and alien national colouring.
     • to carry coals to Newcastle;
     • cold as ice — холодный как лед;
     • as old as the hills — стар как мир;
     • as brown as a berry — загорелый.
3. Phraseological combination (collocation) — is a construction or an expression in which every word has clear independent meaning while one of the components has a bound meaning. It means that phraseological combinations contain one component used in its direct meaning while the other is used figuratively.
   • To make faces — строить рожи;
   • To make amends — возмещать убытки;
   • To make a fortune — составить состояние;
   • To make a bed — застилать постель.

Ways of Translating Idioms:

1. Substitution with the analogue.
2. Literal or calque translation — can be employed even if there is an idiom analogue. A word-for-word translation is used in translating metaphors, phraseological synonyms, and puns. Literal translation usually leads to playing upon figurative and literal sense of an idiom.
3. Translation based on antonyms.
4. Explanatory translation — when an original metaphor appears to be a little obscure and not very important, it may be replaced with a descriptive translation.

Discussion and research points

1. How attached are you to the notion that anything that can be thought can be said, and anything that can be said can be understood, and anything that can be thought and said in one culture or language can be said and understood in another? How important is it for you to believe this? Can you imagine being a translator without believing it? If so, how do you think translation is possible? If not, how does talk of radical cultural relativism make you feel?
2. A first-world translator should never assume his or her intuitions are right about the meaning of a third-world text — or a male translator about a text written by a women, etc. What is your «take» on this statement? How far do you agree, how far do you disagree? How easy or hard is it not to assume your intuitions are right about a text? How much does it depend on the text?
3. What are the main types of set expressions? What role do set expressions play in communication? What role do they play in the translating process?
4. What is an idiom? What are the meaningful components of an idiom? In what way can an equivalent to a SL idiom be found in TL? What factors should be considered in selecting such an equivalent?
5. How can a word-for-word transfer be used in the translating process? Should the syntactical structure of the source text be always changed in translation? How should the TL structures be selected in the target text?
6. What is lexical co-occurrence? Are co-occurrence rules usually the same in SL and TL? What techniques can be used by the translator to solve the problem of the difference in co-occurrence?
7. Does the translation theory dictate strict rules to the translator? What makes translation a creative process? Can the translator automatically apply the theoretical postulates in each particular case?

VI. GRAMMATICAL PROBLEMS OF THE TRANSLATION

Equivalence is achieved by different transformations: grammatical, lexical and stylistic. The causes generating these transformations are not always purely grammatical but may be lexical as well, though grammatical causes naturally prevail due to differences in the SL and TL grammatical structures.

Non-equivalents: some English grammatical forms and structures have no corresponding counterparts in Russian, others have only partial equivalents. The first group includes: articles, the Gerund and the Past Perfect Tense.

Partial Equivalence. SL and TL grammatical forms hardly ever coincide fully. The scope of their meaning and their functions and usage generally differ, therefore these forms are mostly partial equivalence.

The category of number in English and Russian is a case in point. Most often the use of singular and the plural in the two languages coincides. But divergences in the use of the singular and the plural appear in the first place in the so-called Singularia and Pluralia Tantum, that is, in those nouns which have either only a singular or a plural form (gate — ворота; ink — чернила; money — деньги; and vice versa: gallows — виселица; news — новости).

There is also a considerable difference between the use of the Passive voice in English and in Russian. The English language allows different types of passive constructions and there are a number of verbs in English, which can be used, in the passive voice while the correlated verb in Russian cannot. For example, many English verbs are used both transitive and intransitive.

The Infinitive and the Participles are the categories that exist in Russian but there are considerable differences in their forms and their use. The English Infinitive has Perfect and Continuous forms which are absent in the Russian language, whereas these Verbals in Russian have perfective and imperfective aspects, non-existent in English.

There was an odd thing for him to do. — Странно, что он так поступил.

Types of grammatical transformations.

1. Transpositions — may be defined as a change in the order of linguistic elements: words, phrases, clauses and sentences. Their order in the TL may not correspond to that in the SL text.
2. Replacements. The substitution of parts of speech is a common and most important type of replacements. Every word functions in the language as a member of certain grammatical clause, that is, as a distinct part of speech: noun, verb, adjective or adverb. However, the S and T languages do not necessarily have correlated words belonging to the same grammatical class. In such cases, replacements are necessary.
3. Additions — the tendency towards compression both in the grammatical and in the lexical systems of the English language often makes additions necessary and indispensable. Much has already been said about additions that accompany translations and replacements. This is particularly true in the translation of infinitive, participle and gerundial complexes. There are other cases when additions are caused by compressed structures such as the absolute possessive, attributes formed by N1+N2 structures and by attributive groups.
4. Omissions. Some lexical structural elements of the English sentence may be regarded as redundant from the point of view of translation as they are not consonant with the norms and usage of the Russian language.

Discussion and research points

1. Find recent reviews of translations in the press in your own languages. What kinds of comments are made about the translation itself?
2. Modern translation theory tends to criticize the simplicity of the «literal vs. free» debate. Why, then, do you think that the vocabulary of that earlier period often continues to be used in reviews of translation, in comments by teachers and examiners, and in writings by literary translators themselves?
3. I have endeavored to make Virgil speak such English as he would himself have spoken, if he had been born in England, and in this present age', wrote Dryden in 1697 in his preface to his translation of the Aeneid. How do you imagine he would have set about doing this? What issues does it raise for the literary translator?
4. Do translators' prefaces frequently appear in translations in your own country? Why do you think this is? If they do, what function do they serve, and what kind of language do they use to describe the translation?
5. What are the main types of grammatical transformations? What is a word-for-word (blueprint) translation? What are the characteristic features of the partitioning and integration techniques? In what way can grammatical units be transformed in the translating process?
6. What are complex translation transformations? What is the technique of antonymous translation? What is the role of compensation in translation?
7. What are the two main stages of the translating process? Must the translator understand the original text before he begins to produce his text in TL? In what way does the translator's understanding of the source text differ from that by a SL native speaker?
8. What makes understanding possible? Where can the translator find the necessary information of what a segment of the text really means? What is context? What is background knowledge?

VII. MAIN TYPES OF TRANSLATION

Though the basic characteristics of translation can be observed in all translation events, different types of translation can be singled out depending on the predominant communicative function of the source text or the form of speech involved in the translation process. Thus we can distinguish between literary and informative translation, on the one hand, and between written and oral translation (or interpretation), on the other hand.

Literary translation deals with literary texts, i.e. works of fiction or poetry whose main function is to make an emotional or aesthetic impression upon the reader. Their communicative value depends, first and foremost, on their artistic quality and the translator's primary task is to reproduce this quality in translation.

Informative translation is rendering into the target language non-literary texts, the main purpose of which is to convey a certain amount of ideas, to inform the reader. However, if the source text is of some length, its translation can be listed as literary or informative only as an approximation. A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative character. Contrariwise, informative translation may comprise some elements aimed at achieving an aesthetic effect. Within each group further gradations can be made to bring out more specific problems in literary or informative translation.

Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translations may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems. Each of these forms of literary activities comprises a number of subgenres and the translator may specialize in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and experience. The particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works of each genre are more literary than linguistic. The great challenge to the translator is to combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit.

The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the peculiarities of his individual style and manner and so on. This involves both linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator must be a versatile scholar and a talented writer or poet.

A number of subdivisions can be also suggested for informative translations, though the principles of classification here are somewhat different. Here we may single out translations of scientific and technical texts, of newspaper materials, of official papers and some other types of texts such as public speeches, political and propaganda materials, advertisements, etc., which are, so to speak, intermediate, in that there is a certain balance between the expressive and referential functions, between reasoning and emotional appeal.

Translation of scientific and technical materials has a most important role to play in our age of the revolutionary technical progress. There is hardly a translator or an interpreter today who has not to deal with technical matters. Even the «purely» literary translator often comes across highly technical stuff in works of fiction or even in poetry. An in-depth theoretical study of the specific features of technical translation is an urgent task of translation linguistics while training of technical translators is a major practical problem.

In technical translation the main goal is to identify the situation described in the original. The predominance of the referential function is a great challenge to the translator who must have a good command of the technical terms and a sufficient understanding of the subject matter to be able to give an adequate description of the situation even if this is not fully achieved in the original. The technical translator is also expected to observe the stylistic requirements of scientific and technical materials to make text acceptable to the specialist.

Some types of texts can be identified not so much by their positive distinctive features as by the difference in their functional characteristics in the two languages. English newspaper reports differ greatly from their Russian counterparts due to the frequent use of colloquial, slang and vulgar elements, various paraphrases, eye-catching headlines, etc.

When the translator finds in a newspaper text the headline «Minister bares his teeth on fluoridation» which just means that this minister has taken a resolute stand on the matter, he will think twice before referring to the minister's teeth in the Russian translation. He would rather use a less expressive way of putting it to avoid infringement upon the accepted norms of the Russian newspaper style.

Apart from technical and newspaper materials it may be expedient to single out translation of official diplomatic papers as a separate type of informative translation. These texts make a category of their own because of the specific requirements to the quality of their translations. Such translations are often accepted as authentic official texts on a par with the originals. They are important documents every word of which must be carefully chosen as a matter of principle. That makes the translator very particular about every little meaningful element of the original which he scrupulously reproduces in his translation. This scrupulous imitation of the original results sometimes in the translator more readily erring in literality than risking to leave out even an insignificant element of the original contents.

Journalistic (or publicistic) texts dealing with social or political matters are sometimes singled out among other informative materials because they may feature elements more commonly used in literary text (metaphors, similes and other stylistic devices) which cannot but influence the translator's strategy. More often, however, they are regarded as a kind of newspaper materials (periodicals).

There are also some minor groups of texts that can be considered separately because of the specific problems their translation poses to the translator. They are film scripts, comic strips, commercial advertisements and the like. In dubbing a film the translator is limited in his choice of variants by the necessity to fit the pronunciation of the translated words to the movement of the actor's lips. Translating the captions in a comic strip, the translator will have to consider the numerous allusions to the facts well-known to the regular readers of comics but less familiar to the Russian readers. And in dealing with commercial advertisements he must bear in mind that their sole purpose is to win over the prospective customers. Since the text of translation will deal with quite a different kind of people than the original advertisement was meant for, there is the problem of achieving the same pragmatic effect by introducing the necessary changes in the message.

Though the present manual is concerned with the problems of written translation from English into Russian, some remarks should be made about the obvious classification of translations as written or oral. As the names suggest, in written translation the source text is in written form, as is the target text. In oral translation or interpretation the interpreter listens to the oral presentation of the original and translates it as an oral message in TL. As a result, in the first case the Receptor of the translation can read it while in the second case he hears it.

There are also some intermediate types. The interpreter rendering his translation by word of mouth may have the text of the original in front of him and translate it «at sight». A written translation can be made of the original recorded on the magnetic tape that can be replayed as many times as is necessary for the translator to grasp the original meaning. The translator can dictate his «at sight» translation of a written text to the typist or a short-hand writer with TR getting the translation in written form.

These are all, however, modifications of the two main types of translation. The line of demarcation between written and oral translation is drawn not only because of their forms but also because of the sets of conditions in which the process takes place. The first is continuous, the other momentary. In written translation the original can be read and re-read as many times as the translator may need or like. The same goes for the final product. The translator can re-read his translation, compare it to the original, make the necessary corrections or start his work all over again. He can come back to the preceding part of the original or get the information he needs from the subsequent messages. These are most favourable conditions and here we can expect the best performance and the highest level of equivalence. That is why in theoretical discussions we have usually examples from written translations where the translating process can be observed in all its aspects.

The conditions of oral translation impose a number of important restrictions on the translator's performance. Here the interpreter receives a fragment of the original only once and for a short period of time. His translation is also a one-time act with no possibility of any return to the original or any subsequent corrections. This creates additional problems and the users have sometimes; to be content with a lower level of equivalence.

There are two main kinds of oral translation — consecutive and simultaneous. In consecutive translation the translating starts after the original speech or some part of it has been completed. Here the interpreter's strategy and the final results depend, to a great extent, on the length of the segment to be translated. If the segment is just a sentence or two the interpreter closely follows the original speech. As often as not, however, the interpreter is expected to translate a long speech, which has lasted for scores of minutes or even longer. In this case, he has to remember a great number of messages and keep them in mind until he begins his translation. To make this possible the interpreter has to take notes of the original messages, various systems of notation having been suggested for the purpose. The study of, and practice in, such notation is the integral part of the interpreter's training as are special exercises to develop his memory.

Sometimes the interpreter is set a time limit to give his rendering, which means that he will have to reduce his translation considerably, selecting and reproducing the most important parts of the original and dispensing with the rest. This implies the ability to make a judgment on the relative value of various messages and to generalize or compress the received information. The interpreter must obviously be a good and quick-witted thinker.

In simultaneous interpretation, the interpreter is supposed to be able to give his translation while the speaker is uttering the original message. This can be achieved with a special radio or telephone-type equipment. The interpreter receives the original speech through his earphones and simultaneously talks into the microphone, which transmits his translation to the listeners. This type of translation involves a number of psycholinguistic problems, both of theoretical and practical nature.

Discussion and research points

1. What are the two principles of translation classification? What are the main types of translation? What is the difference between literary and informative translations?
2. How can literary translations be subdivided? What is the main difficulty of translating a work of high literary merit? What qualities and skills are expected of a literary translator?
3. How can informative translations be subdivided? Are there any intermediate types of translation? What type of informative translations plays an especially important role in the modern world?
4. What is the main goal of a technical translation? What specific requirements is the technical translator expected to meet? What problems is the theory of technical translation concerned with?
5. What are the main characteristics of translations dealing with newspaper, diplomatic and other official materials? What specific problems emerge in translating film scripts and commercial advertisements?
6. What is the main difference between translation and interpretation? Which of them is usually made at a higher level of accuracy? Are there any intermediate forms of translation?
7. How can interpretation be classified? What are the characteristic features of consecutive interpretation? What is the role of notation in consecutive interpretation?

VIII. HEADLINE TRANSLATION

Newspapers were created to spread news about various aspects of life: politics, sports, arts, education, industry, etc. Being the main tool to attract readers to any news piece, headlines assume special importance. This special importance resulted in special structure and characteristics. Due to the novel technique and style used in English news headlines, most translators face several problems when attempting to translate them. One reason for this is the difficulty of understanding them in the first place.

Grammar of English News Headlines

Due to the unfamiliar style and the violation of many grammatical rules, English news headlines may seem very odd and unacceptable to many readers at first glance.

• Headlines are not always complete sentences. Many headlines consist of noun phrases with no verb. MORE WAGE CUTS, HOLIDAY HOTEL DEATH.
• Headlines often contain strings of three, four or more nouns; nouns earlier in the string modify those that follow. FURNITURE FACTORY PAY CUT ROW refers to a ROW (disagreement) about a CUT (reduction) in PAY at a FACTORY that makes FURNITURE. It sometimes helps to read them backwards. MORE POWER CUTS (There are/will be more power cuts), TERROR ALERT IN CAPITAL (There is/was a terror alert in the capital).
• Headlines often leave out articles and the verb be. Indefinite articles (a, an) and the definite article (the) are omitted in headlines in order to save space. STRONG EARTHQUACK ROCKS EAST INDIA, SHAKESPEARE PLAY IMMORAL SAYS HEADMASTER.
• In headlines, simple tenses are often used instead of progressive or perfect forms. The simple present is used for both present and past events. BLIND GIRL CLIMBS EVEREST (= ... has climbed ...), STUDENTS FIGHT FOR COURSE CHANGES (= ... are fighting ...). The present progressive is used to talk about changes. Be is usually dropped. BRITAIN GETTING WARMER, SAY SCIENTISTS (=Earth is getting warmer.), TRADE FIGURES IMPROVING (=Trade figures are improving.)
• Many headline words are used as both nouns and verbs, and nouns are often used to modify other nouns. So it is not always easy to work out the structure of a sentence. Compare: US CUTS AID TO THIRD WORLD (= The US reduces its help ... CUTS is a verb, AID is a noun.) AID CUTS ROW (= There has been a disagreement about the reduction in aid. AID and CUTS are both nouns.) CUTS AID REBELS (= The reduction is helping the revolutionaries, CUTS is a noun, AID is a verb.)
• Headlines often use infinitives to refer to the future. PM TO VISIT AUSTRALIA (=The PM is going to visit Australia). For is also used to refer to future movements or plans. TROOPS FOR GLASGOW? (= Are soldiers going to be sent to Glasgow?)
• Auxiliary verbs are usually dropped from passive structures. MURDER HUNT: MAN HELD (= ... a man is being held by police.) SIX KILLED IN EXPLOSION (= Six people have been killed ...). Note that forms like HELD, ATTACKED are usually past participles with passive meanings, not past tenses (which are rare in headlines). Examples: AID ROW PRESIDENT ATTACKED (= ... the President has been attacked.)
• 'As' and 'in' are often used instead of longer connecting expressions. HOSPITAL BOSS AXED AS PATIENT DIE (= ... because patients die.) FOOTBALL MANAGER IN CAR CRASH.

Punctuation in English News Headlines

It is a known fact that one cannot produce a correct sentence without employing a punctuation mark. This definitely applies on headlines as well. Punctuation marks are especially important in headlines writing because they contribute in achieving both clarity and concision.

Here is the some of the most common punctuation marks used in headlines and the meanings behind them:

• Colon: BUSH ON IRAQI INVASION: «THIS AGGRESSION WILL NOT STAND». Furthermore, a colon is also used to separate the subject of a headline from what is said about it. MOTORWAY CRASH: DEATH TOLL RISES.
• Comma: The comma can be employed in two exceptional ways other than its known use. One of which is using it to mean the word «and», the other, although less common, is the use of a comma to mean the word «but». For example: MANMOHAN, SONIA TO VISIT MUZZAFFARNAGAR. A comma is also very useful in separating two news points in the headline. CONGRESS FAVOURS EARLY POLLS, BJP AGAINST IT.
• Semi-colon: Semi-colons are often used to separate two clauses. SHINDE INDUCTED AS HOME MINISTER; TEWARI GETS CABINET RANK, LINCOLN: WAR INEVITABLE; VICTORY ESSENTIAL. The semicolon is used to separate two thoughts of equal weight.
• Quotation marks: Quotation marks («...») are used to convey the words exactly as they were said by someone, they also indicate that the report does not necessarily claim that they are true. CRASH DRIVER «HAD BEEN DRINKING».
• Question marks: A question mark (?) is usually employed to indicate the uncertainty of something. CRISIS OVER BY SEPTEMBER?

Discussion and research points:

1. Below is a list of some of the forms of language and techniques often used by headline writers. Read this list carefully. Then find in British or American newspapers each form of expression with a headline which uses that particular technique to make its meaning. Alliteration: repeating the same first letter or syllable (usually a consonant) in successive words to create a poetic or humorous effect (Sexy Suzy's sausage surprise!). Assonance: repeating certain vowel sounds in the same phrase or sentence. (Away Day for Gay Ray). Cliché: An over-used phrase or expression which has lost its originality - Phew ! What a scorcher! Euphemism: the use of a polite or pleasant form of words to describe something less pleasant, e.g. the little girl's room. Exclamation: usually used to indicate surprise, sarcasm or amusement, e.g. Gosh! Expletives: exclamation or swearword, usually expressing a strong emotion, and usually deleted or substituted by a less offensive word or sound. Metaphor: implied comparison between two unconnected people or things. Metonym: where the name of a specific object or idea stands for something else to which it is related or a part of. Thus, the Royal Family is often referred to as The Throne, or The Crown; «the bottle» could mean milk or alcohol. Misspellings words: deliberately misspelt for effect, e.g. Gawd for God. Parody: an imitation of a well-known phrase or saying which is in some way distorted or changed. Pun: a play on words, often with a double meaning. Rhetorical question: a question to which no answer is expected. Rhyming: words ending in identical sounds, e.g. Pix nix flix in stix. Slang: words or phrases not considered part of standard English, e.g. fresh, cool, dread.
2. Now read the following outline story. Top pop singer Madonna has announced her intention to give up her controversial and massively successful musical career in order to attend university and retrain as a doctor. With a partner create three different headlines of your own for the story. Each of your three headlines should: a) be written for a different newspaper (don't forget to say which - although it should be fairly clear from your choice of language) b) use one of the techniques from the list above, in order to present the story in a different way.
3. Read the following headline. Work out what kind of news item you think it refers to, and write the first paragraph of the accompanying story. DOC KNOCKS FROCKS IN FLU SHOCKS

I. Translation of Equivalents

II. Handling translator's false friends

III. Translation of idioms

IV. Handling attributive groups

V. Grammatical Aspects of Translation

VI. Lexical Problems of Translation