(Catford)A-Linguistic-Theory-of-Translation(周骄俪).doc

J. C. Catford. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
A Linguistic Theory of Translation
J. C. Catford

1． General Linguistic Theory

1.0 (p1) General Linguistics is, primarily, a theory about how languages work.

Language is a type of patterned human behavior. It is a way, perhaps the most important way, in which human beings interact in social situations. Language-behavior is externalized or manifested in some kind of bodily activity on the part of a performer, and presupposes the existence of at least one other human participant in the situation, an addressee.

(p2) Language is patterned behavior. It is, indeed, the pattern which is the language. On any given occasion, the particular vocal movements and the resultant sound-waves can be described with a delicacy, or depth of detail, limited only by the delicacy of the apparatus used for observation and analysis. And the precise quality of these vocal movements and sound-waves will be found to differ on different occasions, even when the speaker is ‘saying the same thing’. From the linguistic point of view, the important thing is that, on each occasion of ‘saying the same thing’ the vocal activities of the speaker conform to the same pattern.

The overt language-behavior described above is causally related to various other features of the situation in which it occurs. There are specific objects, events, relations and so on, in the situation, which lead the performer to produce these particular vocal movements, and no others. The precise nature of the situational features which are relatable to the performer’s linguistic behavior will be found to differ on different occasions, even when he is ‘saying the same thing’.

Form the linguistic point of view, however, the important thing again is that, in each case, the situational features which lead to ‘the same’ utterance conform to the same general pattern.

Language then is an activity which may be said to impinge on the world at large at two ends. On the one hand, it is manifested in specific kinds of overt behavior (e.g. vocal movements): on the other hand, it is related to specific objects, events, etc. in situation. Both of these—vocal movements, and actual events, etc.—are outside of language itself. They are extralinguistic events. They are the phonic substance in which vocal activity is manifested, and the situation (or situation substance) to which this activity is related. The language itself is, however, the organization or patterning which language-behavior implicitly imposes on these two kinds of substance—language is form, not substance.

1.2 (p3) in order to account for language-events we make abstractions from these events: abstractions of various types, or at a series of levels.
1.21 We distinguish, first, the levels of medium-substance (phonic substance, for the spoken medium, and graphic substance for the written medium), and situation (or situation substance), both of which are, in fact, extralinguistic. The internal levels of language are those of medium-form—phonology and graphology, arrived at by a process of abstraction from phonic and graphic substance, and the differently abstracted levels, which Halliday calls the ‘formal levels’—grammar and lexis.
The relationship between (the units of) grammar/lexis and situation (substance) is that of contextual meaning, or context. (p4) The relationship between (the units of) phonology and phonetic substance has no generally recognized name, though ‘phonetic meaning’ might be suggested. The relationship between graphology and graphic substance might likewise be called ‘graphetic meaning’. Context is the interlevel relating grammar/lexis and situation, indicated by the dashed line on the right of the above diagram.

1.22 The levels at which we make abstractions from language-events are thus the following:
1.221 Grammatical/lexical form
(i) Grammar: the level of linguistic form at which operate closed systems: the characteristics of a closed system being: (1) the number of terms is finite; (2) each term is exclusive of the other; (3) any change in the number of terms would change the ‘values’ (or ‘formal meanings’) of the other terms (e.g. systems of pronouns, of deictics, of number, of case, of tense…etc.)
(ii) Lexis: the level of linguistic form at which operates open sets (e.g. the open sets of items often occurring as examples or ‘exponents’ of nouns, verbs, etc.)

1.222 Medium form
(i) Phonology: the formal units into which phonic substance is organized, and which operate, usually in combination, as the exponents of grammatical/lexical forms.
(ii)Graphology: the formal units into which graphic substance is organized, and which operate, usually in combination, as the exponents of grammatical/lexical forms.

1.223 Medium Substance
(i) Phonic substance: actual vocal sounds—the substance in which phonology is manifested.
(ii)Graphic substance: actual visible marks—the substance in which graphology is manifested.
Both types of medium substance have a certain patterning or organization imposed upon them by medium-form.

1.224 Situation (or situation substance). All those features of situations, excluding medium substance, which are related or relatable to language-behavior. Situation substance has a certain organization imposed upon it by grammatical/lexical form.

1.23 (p5) In addition, we must consider the interlevel of context (or contextual meaning): the interlevel of statements about the distinctive features of situation-substance which are relatable to particular grammatical/lexical forms. As we have said above, there is another interlevel: the interlevel of statements about the distinctive features of medium substance which are relatable to medium forms.
It will be clear that context or contextual meaning is what is most usually understood by ‘meaning’: in our theory, this is only one part of meaning, which also includes formal meaning which is the way any item operates in the network of formal relation.

1.3 The fundamental categories of linguistic theory—applicable at least to the levels of grammar, phonology and probably graphology—are unit, structure, class and system.

1.31 By a unit we mean a stretch of language activity which is the carrier of a pattern of a particular kind. In English phonology, for example, there is a unit, the tone-group, which is the carrier of recurrent meaningful patterns of pitch.
In English grammar we have units such as sentence, clause and group: each of these is the carrier of a particular kind of meaningful grammatical pattern.

1.311 (p6) The units of grammar or of phonology operate in hierarchies—‘larger’ or more inclusive units being made up of ‘smaller’ or less inclusive units. They form a scale of units at different ranks. Thus, the sentences quoted above each consist of two clauses. The sentence is a unit of higher rank than the clause. And each clause consists of several groups—the clause being a unit of higher rank than the group.

1.32 The unit is the category set up to account for those stretches of language-activity which carry recurrent meaningful patterns. The patterns themselves still have to be accounted for—and these are what we call structures. A structure is an arrangement of elements. Thus, the elements of structure of the English unit ‘clause’ are P (predicator), S (subject), C (complement), A (adjunct).

1.33 (p7) By a class we mean a grouping of members of a unit in terms of the way in which they operate in the structure of the unit next above in which they operate in the structure of the unit next above in the rank scale. Structure, as we have said, is stated in terms of ordered arrangements of elements: thus, in English, the elements of structure of the unit clause are S, P, C, A. The units which operate as exponents of these elements are themselves groups. Groups, then, may be classified in terms of the particular elements of clause structure which they expound. Thus we have, in English, the class of Verbal Groups, which operate at – or as exponents of – P in clause-structure; the class of Nominal Groups which operate as exponents of S or C in clause-structure, etc.

1.34 By a system we mean a finite set of alternant, among which a choice must be made. Very often, these alternants, the terms in a system, are the members of a class.
An example of a system in grammar might be the number-system (Sing/ Plur) (Sing/Dual/Plural), etc., of many languages. Where number is a system of the Nominal group (as in English) the terms in the system are themselves sub-groups or sub-classes of the class.

1.4 We have referred already to rank and have used the terms exponent and delicacy. These three terms refer to three scales which are part of the general theory of language, and of language-description.

1.41 (p8) The rank scale is the scale on which units are arranged in a grammatical or phonological hierarchy. In English grammar we set up a hierarchy of 5 units—the largest, or ‘highest’, on the rank-scale is the sentence. The smallest, or ‘lowest’, on the rank scale is the morpheme. Between these, in ‘descending’ order, are the clause, the group and the word. By placing these in this order on the scale of rank we mean that every sentence consists of one or more than one clause, every clause of one or more than one group, every group of one or more than one word, and every word of one or more than one morpheme.

1.411 The normal relation between units in a grammatical hierarchy is that stated here: namely that a unit at any rank consists of one or more unit of the rank next below, or, conversely, that a unit at any rank operates in the structure of the unit next above.
We must, however, make allowance for the fact that in all languages we find ‘Chinese box’ arrangements of units, in which a unit may sometimes operate in the structure of a unit of the same or of lower rank. To deal with this, we make use of the concept of rank-shift.
Thus, in English, clauses normally operate as exponents of elements of sentence-structure. But we also find clauses operating within groups, i.e. as exponents of elements in the structure of a unit of the rank below the clause.

1.42 (p9) The scale of exponence is a scale of ‘exemplification’ or of degrees of abstraction, running from ‘highest degree of abstraction’ to ‘most specific and concrete exemplification’.
Exponence is related to rank in the sense that an element of structure of a unit at one rank is expounded by – or has as its exponent – a unit or units of the rank next below. But exponence is a separate scale, and at any one rank we may go off sideways, as it were, to a relatively concrete exemplification: thus we might call the sequence of particular grammatical and lexical items represented by ‘A linguistic theory of translation’ an exponent of the unit ‘group’. In other words, we also use the term exponent in talking of the relationship between the abstract units na items of grammar and lexis and their realization in medium form.

1.43 (p10) The third scale mentioned here is that of delicacy: this is the scale of ‘depth of detail’. At a primary degree of delicacy, we recognize, or set up, only the minimal number of units or classes, etc., which are forced upon us by the data.

1.5Lexis is that part of language which is not describable in terms of closed systems. The distinction between grammar and lexis is not absolute, but rather in the nature of a cline, with very well marked poles, but some overlap in between.

1.51 We deal formally with lexis in terms of collocation and lexical sets. A collocation is the ‘lexical company’ that a particular lexical item keeps. Any particular lexical item tends to collocate most frequently with a range of other lexical items.
A lexical set is a group of lexical items which have similar collocational ranges.

1.52 (p11) Collocation and lexical set are concepts which sometimes enable us to establish the existence of two distinct lexical items, even when both share exactly the same medium exponents.

1.6 …we regard the medium as being to some extent autonomous and detachable from grammar and lexis. Since this view of medium as ‘detachable’ is important for our theory of translation.

1.61 Medium form is a part of a language. Every language has its characteristic phonology and many languages have a characteristic graphology.

1.62 (p12) In other words, the discovery procedure for phonological analysis must depend directly on grammatical/lexical differences. But once the phonology has been established, by discovering what phonic distinctions operate as exponents of grammatical/lexical distinctions in that particular language, it can be regarded – indeed must be regarded – as relatively autonomous or independent. It is this autonomy of phonology which makes it possible for two or more lexical or grammatical items to share the same phonological exponents.

1.63 More striking evidence of the autonomy and detachability of medium is the fact that eh grammar and lexis of one language can be expounded (though often with some losses in distinctiveness) in the medium of another.

1.64 (p13) Graphology, too, is in a sense detachable from the particular language of which it is characteristic.

1.65 It is the detachability of the medium levels from the grammatical/lexical levels which makes phonological and graphological translation possible.

1.71 English Phonology: in English phonology we have a hierarchy of units at four ranks:
(i) Tone-group
(ii) Foot (or rhythmic group)
(iii) Syllable
(iv) Phoneme
The relation between these is the normal one: i.e. every Tone-group consists of one or more Foot, every Foot of one or more Syllable, every Syllable of one or more Phoneme.

1.711 (p14) The tone-group. The elements of tone-group structure are T (tonic) which is always present, and P (pretonic) which may be absent. The exponent of T is a foot, or maor than one foot, which carries one of a system of five contrastive tones: the distinctive tone starts on the first syllable (of the first foot) of the tonic. The exponent of P, if present, is one or more foot preceding the tonic, and carrying one of a restricted range of pretonic intonation contours.

1.712 The location of the tonic is significant. It can be shifted from one foot to another, and such shifts are changes of tonicity.

1.713 The tone-group, then, is the unit which carries contrastive intonation patterns.

1.714 (p15) This is the unit of stress or rhythm. The foot is the carrier of contrastive differences in stress-distribution.

1.717 The syllable is the unit of syllabicity. Syllables sometimes coincide with feet. When syllable-divisions occur within a foot their phonic exponent is a momentary retardation of the major chest-pulse movement.

1.72 In English grammar we recognize a hierarchy of five units:
1. Sentence
2. Cl