DOI: 10.5176/2251-3566_L318.359
Authors: Chu Shiao Ying Sharon
Abstract: This paper addresses the nuances of the use of terms of translation approaches. Based upon simple translation examples between Chinese and English, I discuss why it would be easier to appreciate terms such as ‘literal’, ‘semantic’, and ‘communicative’ translation as convenient labels to describe translation under pre-set conditions, like an artificially devised spectrum of degrees of literalness. The truth is, reality often denies that a translation can belong clearly to one of the categories in such a spectrum and possess an aggregate of necessary and sufficient conditions which would differentiate it from other kinds of translation. As part of this paper, I put forward a further speculation that attributes used to delineate the substance of a particular term of translation approach might just be subject to the different perceptions of analysts. In closing, I point out that a possibly more balanced perspective would be to acknowledge from time to time the explanatory and generalizing power of terms, at the same time also their deficiencies, that when a judgment is to be made of the quality and acceptability of a translation, the said evaluation might as well be done on an ad hoc basis. By putting forward such an argument, I am in a way addressing the long-discussed doubts on the practical value of theories: the argument exists that theories, of which terms constitute an essential component, can fail to serve their purpose of promoting understanding of the nature and practice of translation, one of the reasons being terms are often hampered by their limitations in referring to translation examples, limitations which are perceivably unresolvable.
Keywords: translation studies; translation approaches; literal translation; semantic translation; communicative translation; definition; fuzzy boundary (key words)
Updating...