analysis of source text1.doc

I. analysis of source text
1. analysis of ST stressing its intention and functional aspects
2. analysis of the translator’s interpretation of the SL text’s purpose, his translation method and the translation’s likely readeship
II. comparison of the ST and the translation
selective but representative detailed comparison of ST and TT

III. comments on the translation
evaluation of the translation (a) in the translator’s terms, (b) in the critic’s terms
5. where appropriate, an assessment of the likely place of the translation in the TL culture or discipline
I.1. analysis of ST :
- author’s purpose, his attitude toward the topic
- characterisation of the readership
- category and type of text
- quality of the language to determine the translator’s degree of licence
informative text -> clichés are reduced to neutral language
authoritative texts -> clichés are retained
- state the topic or themes
(don’t discuss author’s life, works, general background, unless
[underline particular problems posed by ST: title, structure, level of language, metaphors, cultural words, proper names, neologism,‘untranslatable words, technical terms, ambiguity, puns, sound effects,
2. analysis of the translator’s purpose: –understand why he has used procedures for a specific aim
Is he deliberatly moderating the figurative language?
translate simple sentences with colloquial and idiomatic phrases?
Is he trying to counter the under-translating tendency of all translations by deliberately over-translating?
To what exent has the TT been deculturalised, or transferred to the TL culture?
3. comparison
[A translation critic determines the general properties -first of ST, and then of TT and uses the underlined words as a basis for a detailed comparison of the two texts
underlined words: neologisms, metaphors, cultural words, and institutional terms peculiar to the SL, proper names, technical terms and‘untranslatable words’ (the ones with no ready one-to-tone equivalent)]
how the translator has solved the particular problems posed by ST
group problems under general heads:
title, structure, metaphors, cultural words, translationese, proper names, neologism, ‘untranslatable’ words, ambiguity, level of language, puns, sound-effect
discuss problems
4. evaluation of the translation
- assess the referential and pragmatic accuracy of the TT by the translator’s standards
Is the TT successful in its own terms)
- assess the referential and pragmatic accuracy of the TT by your standards
assess the quality and extent of the semantic deficit in the TT. Was it inevitable, was it because of the translator’s deficiencies
- assess the TT as a piece of writing, independently of the ST:
in personal or authoritative text, has the translator captured the ideolect of the original?
5. assessment of the importance of the translation in the TL culture or discipline
was it in fact worth translating?
what kind of influence will it have on the language, literature, the ideas in its new melieu?
Quality in translation
A good translation fulfils its intention
informative texts -> it conveys the facts acceptably
vocative text -> it has its purposed effect
expressive text ->
judged ‘adequate’ if explains what the text is about
judged ‘good’ if it is ‘distinguished, if the translator was exceptionally sensitive
as “form is almost as important as content, there is often a tension between the expressive and the aesthetic functions of language and therefore a merely ‘adequate’ translation may be useful to explain what the text is about
but a good translation has to be
‘distinguished’ and the translator exceptionally sensitive;