درباره وبلاگ


طبقه بندی

آخرین پستها


پیوندهای روزانه


ابر برچسبها

آمار وبلاگ

Admin Logo


خواننده مترجم و متن ( مقاله ای در باب اصول و فنون ترجمه )

The reader/translator and the text

It was implicit in our description of the features of transactional and literary text above that it is the way a whole piece of text hangs together that is important. Beaugrande and Dressler (1981: 13, 35) as well as Halliday (1985: 4-6, 48) seem to agree that language should be viewed as a system which is a set of elements functioning together each of which has a function contributing to workings of the whole.

When considering a piece of text from the point of view of the reader, Beaugrande (1980:35) proposes that the text itself be viewed as a system and this view is repeated by Halliday (1985:48) who says that every text provides a context for itself. He says a text hangs together as a result of its internal coherence which comes about from the set of linguistic resources that every language has for linking one part of a text to another. He stresses the importance of the reader's internal expectations in maintaining the flow and understanding of text.

To a large extent, it is the degree of familiarity with the way a text is put together that determines the ease and manner of discovering its meaning. Where emphasis is on real-world meaning and information has been imparted in a systematic and predictable way, readers have a relatively straightforward task. They are able to bring their experience of world knowledge and their experience of similar text to bear in extracting the information involved. In conveying fact, the writer does not present information in a very difficult and ambiguous form... nor force the reader to revise his expectations (Beaugrand, 1978:47). Most readers will decode the same basic information and most translators will pass it on with little distortion.

In contrast, as we have seen above, literary writers commonly construct text in such a way that readers cannot interpret it on relying on their knowledge of "normal" practice with regard to coherence. A unique production elicits its own unique framework. Creative writers are successful when they rely on virtual experience using their own personal choice of grammatical form and lexis. In the process, the writer commonly surprises the reader. There is a gap in expectation in that readers are themselves committed to a predetermined manner of interpreting things (Beaugrande, 1978:44). Not only do poetic devices like metaphor and alliteration demand a personal response, but, sometimes, the normally expected rules and conventions of linguistic coherence are completely shattered. Readers are often forced into at least provisionally accepting the author's views as a point of reference (Beaugrande: ibid) and then are much more personally involved in completing the "jigsaw" than is the case where the extraction of fact from a transactional text is involved.

Though they may disregard the expectation of their readers, creative writers do, however, create their own coherence or artistic pattern. We may study the manner in which each unique piece has been constructed when trying to describe a writer's style. It is the wholeness of the resulting form that conveys artistic meaning. In the interpretation of each artistic creation, both reader and translator must bring their personal life experience to bear. As a result, individual readers and individual translators may well come to different conclusions as to what a particular piece of text means.

As suggested above, transactional language is open to paraphrase. There is no need for translator to take over the source to improve and civilise it in the way suggested by Fitzgerald as cited by Bassnet (1980:xv) when discussing Persian texts. Translators do not need to violate the source text or attempt to create an original text. This is because, with a transactional source text, the meaning is controlled by the writer of the text and is easily decipherable by the translator. An understanding of the internal structure of a transactional source is sufficient to provide a reliable transactional translation in which the majority of the information is preserved. There is no debate over the primacy of content over form or vice versa.

With literary language, however, paraphrase and translation become more problematic. Leech & Short (1981: 25) refer to the fact that the New Critics (a major critical movement of the 1930's and 1940's in America) rejected the idea that a poem conveys a message, preferring to see it as an autonomous verbal artifact. T.S. Eliot, for instance, recommended that a poem should be dealt with as a poem and not a piece of biographical evidence or historical material, something that had been the centre of earlier literary criticism. Leech & Short (ibid) cite Macleish who says that a poem should not mean but be and Tolstoy's affirmation that one of the significant facts about a true work of art is that its content in its entirety can be expressed only by itself. We cannot separate meaning from form. If we imagine that we can separate meaning from form in a literary text, we will discover little meaning. Steiner (1975:24) states that Western art and literature are a set of variations on definitive themes. Further, he goes on to explain that Dada (an anarchical school of literary and artistic movement begun in 1916) believes that, to trigger new themes, language should be re-arranged. Hence, the anarchic bitterness of the later-comer and impeccable of Dada when it proclaims that no new impulses of feeling or recognition will arise until language is demolished. According to Gray (1984:79) the purpose of Dada was a nihilistic revolt against all bourgeois ideas of rationality, meaning, form, and order. Its artists and poets arrange objects and words into meaningless and illogical patterns

ادامه مطلب

نوشته شده توسط :پویان پوروزیری
چهارشنبه 22 دی 1389-02:22 ق.ظ

نمونه ترجمه

خشایار دیهیمی را بیشتر با ترجمه هایی از متون علوم سیاسی و آثار مرتبط با ادبیات ( مجموعه ارزنده ی " نسل قلم " ) می شناسیم. دیهیمی آنچنان که خود می گوید و در کارش نیز به وضوع می توان دید به شفافیت ترجمه و معنا رسانی متن اهمیت بسیار می دهد و همچنان که خود بارها گفته است آن چه که باید از آن ترسید نه ترجمه مغلوط که ترجمه ی نامفهوم است.

برای شروع و مقابله ی بخش کوچکی از کار آقای دیهیمی، یک پاراگراف از مقاله ی " جان پلامناتز " تحت عنوان " لیبرالیسم " انتخاب شده است. ترجمه این مقاله بلند در نشریه ناقد به چاپ رسیده است.

Political theory in the West has had a "bias" towards democracy from the time that the modern state arose and long before it became democratic. It has held that the legitimacy of government derives from the consent of the governed, and has spoken of this consent as if it consisted, not in mere acquiescence or acceptance of custom, but in a specific act, a social contract. No doubt, it began by relegating this contract to a mythical past; and yet contract implies deliberate agreement. This is already clear in Locke's political philosophy; when he says that every man must consent for himself, since the consent of his ancestors cannot bind him. Locke, of course, was no democrat, and qualified his initial assertions so as to draw no democratic conclusions from them. But he spoke of rights that all men have, merely because they are men, and he argued that governments are obliged to protect these rights, and that subjects have the right to resist or remove governments when they fail in this duty. His argument has democratic implications, though neither he nor his contemporaries drew them

فلسفه ی سیاسی در غرب از زمانی که دولت مدرن سر برآورد و مدت ها پیش از آن که این دولت دومکراتیک شود، نوعی " سوگیری " به سمت دوموکراسی داشت. اعتقاد بر این بوده است مشروعیت حکومت از رضایت حکومت شوندگان نشآت می گیرد، و از این رضایت طوری سخن گفته شده است که گویی این رضایت نه صرفاً در اطاعت یا پذیرش آداب و سنن، بلکه در یک عمل خاص، یعنی در قرارداد اجتماعی، نهفته است. بی تردید، این نظر با ربط دادن این قرارداد به گذشته ای اسطوره ای آغاز شد، و با این حال، قرارداد ایفا کننده ی توافق دلبخواهی است. این مطلب در فلسفه ی سیاسی جان لاک کاملاً مشهود است، آنجا که می گوید: هر شخصی باید شخصاً رضایت بدهد، زیرا رضایت اجداد او نمی تواند او را مقید سازد. البته لاک دموکرات نبود، و تصریحات اولیه ی خود را چنان مقید و مشروط می کرد که نتوان از آنها نتیجه ای دموکراتیک گرفت. اما او از حقوقی سخن می گفت که انسانها به صرف انسان بودن دارند، و می گفت حکومت ها مکلفند از این حقوق حفاظت کنند و اتباع حق دارند زمانی که حکومت از عهده ی این وظیفه اش بر نیامد در برابرش مقاومت کنند یا سرنگونش کنند. استدلال و گفته های او نتایج دموکراتیک دارد، هرچند نه خود او این نتایج را گرفت و نه هیچ یک از معاصرانش.

نوشته شده توسط :پویان پوروزیری
جمعه 30 مهر 1389-06:00 ب.ظ

نمونه های ترجمه

سرمشق گیری از نمونه های ترجمه ی مترجمان صاحب نام و صاحب صلاحیت، یکی از شاه کلیدهای موفقیت و کسب خبرگی برای مترجمان تازه کار است. از این رو مقابله ترجمه های خوب با متن اصلی جزیی تفکیک ناپذیر از سیر پختگی و مهارت افزایی مترجمان نو آموز به شمار می رود                     .


به ترجمه چند جمله زیر که توسط دکتر علی خزائی فر انجام شده است توجه کنید


A bomb exploded yesterday in a car belonging to a well-known magistrate. No one was hurt, but the vehicle was completely destroyed


روز گذشته بمبی در اتومبیلی متعلق به یک قاضی سرشناس منفجر شد. کسی آسیب ندید اما وسیله نقلیه بکلی از بین رفت



It was yellow fever that was responsible for de Lessep's failure to build the Panama Canal. The subsequent success of the Americans in completing this great venture was due to the discovery that yellow fever was transmitted to men by mosquitoes


تب زرد بود که باعث شکست دولسپ در احداث کانال پاناما شد. بعدها نیز آمریکائیها تنها پس از کشف این نکته که تب زرد از طریق پشه به انسان منتقل می شود توانستند این طرح بزرگ و مخاطره آمیز را تکمیل کنند



Mr. Berlinger never held high office outside the party, because the Communists have never won a share of government power. That would normally exclude him from a state funeral, but it is possible that the honor will be extended to him


آقای برلینگر هیچگاه سمت مهمی خارج از حزب نداشت زیرا کمونیستها هیچگاه در قدرت دولت سهیم نبوده اند. این نکته طبعاً او را از تشعییع جنازه دولتی محروم می کند، اما احتمال دارد که این افتخار نصیب او نیز بشود



Though we may enjoy reading about the lives of others, it is extremely doubtful whether we would equally enjoy reading about ourselves


ما شاید از خواندن شرح زندگی دیگران لذت ببریم، اما بعید است خواندن خبری درباره خودمان به همان اندازه برایمان لذت بخش باشد



Those who never have to change house become indiscriminate collectors of what can only be called clutter


کسانی که مجبور نیستند یکسر خانه عوض کنند، هر خرت و پرتی را جمع می کنند


Man cannot be too careful in his choice of enemies     


آدم هرچه در انتخاب دشمنان خود دقّت کند کم است

نوشته شده توسط :پویان پوروزیری
پنجشنبه 8 مهر 1389-10:02 ق.ظ

شبکه اجتماعی فارسی کلوب | Buy Website Traffic | Buy Targeted Website Traffic