Text analysis in translation — страница 10

  • Просмотров 8320
  • Скачиваний 56
  • Размер файла 92

housewife normally expects a recipe to contain instructions for the preparation of a certain dish, and, indeed, that is why she reads it. Her attention is directed at the content of the text (e.g. what ingredients will she need, what has she got to do?). Recipes usually have a rather conventionalized form, not only with regard to their composition (first a list of ingredients, then the instructions in chronological order) but also with regard to syntactical structures (e.g. imperatives, parataxis) and lexical features (e.g. terminology and formulaic expressions, such as "bring to the boil", "stirring constantly", etc.). The reader will only become aware of the text form if it is not as expected: if, for example, the recipe is written as a poem or if the list

of ingredients is missing. The expectation of the receiver can sometimes lead to a certain tolerance. For example, when reading a menu, whose text function can clearly be inferred from the situation, but which is translated badly into their own language, tourists in a foreign country may not feel annoyed, as they normally would, but rather amused by the orthographic mistakes or unidiomatic collocations as long as they get some information about what to eat or drink. Normally, of course, the text producer will try as far as possible to meet the expectations of the addressed audience. There are cases, however, where an author disregards or even deliberately ignores the addressees' expectations in order to make them sit up and take notice or to make them aware of certain patterns of

thinking, etc. Checklist The following questions may help to find out the relevant information about the addressed audience and their expectations: What information about the addressed audience can be inferred from the text environment? What can be learned about the addressees from the available information about the sender and his/her intention? What clues to the ST addressee's expectations, background knowledge etc. can be inferred from other situational factors (medium, place, time, motive, and function)? Is there any information about the reactions of the ST receiver(s) which may influence translation strategies? What conclusions can be drawn from the data and clues obtained about the addressee regarding other extratextual dimensions (intention, place, time, and function),

and the intratextual features? Medium Speech vs. writing The concept of medium or channel has to be interpreted rather broadly. We refer to "medium" as the means or vehicle which conveys the text to the reader (in communication theory, "channel" stands for sound waves or print on paper). The translator is, however, interested less in the technical distinctions and more in the aspects of perceptibility, storage of information and the presuppositions of communicative interaction. First of all we have to ask whether the text is being transmitted in a face-to-face communication or in writing. The means of transmission affects not only the conditions of reception, but more particularly also those of production. It determines how the information should be presented

in respect of level of explicitness, arrangement of arguments, choice of sentence types, features of cohesion, use of non-verbal elements such as facial expressions and gestures, etc. The effect of the chosen medium on the intratextual factors can be illustrated by looking at the deictic aspect: situational references, which in face-to-face communication do not have to be verbalized explicitly because the participants are a part of the situation, must be expressed much more clearly in written communication. Example In face-to-face communication, deictic expressions, such as here, by my side, or today, or expressions referring to the participants of communication, such as all of us, or as the speaker before me correctly remarked, are unambiguous. However, in a written text they

can only be decoded correctly in connection with the information on time, place, sender, receivers, etc. given in the text itself or in the text environment, such as title page, imprint, introduction lead, etc. The categories of speech and writing cannot, however, always be separated completely, as there are spoken texts which are reproduced in a written form (e.g. a statement made by a witness) and written texts which are spoken (e.g. lectures). Crystal & Davy (1969) therefore introduce the concept of complex medium, comprising "language which is spoken to be written, as in dictation, or language written to be spoken, as in news-broadcasting", and even subclassifications such as "language written to be read aloud as if written". This shows that for our