putting it all together - Iain Halliday, Università di Catania

putting it all together
(translation again)
The following extract comes from Paola Faini’s Tradurre: Manuale teorico e
pratico, Rome, Carocci, 2008.
1
1
Definire il problema della traduzione
Defining the problem of translation
1. Individuare il senso del termine “traduzione”
1. Identifying the meaning of the term “translation”
Il dibattito culturale che anima oggi la ricerca sulla
traduzione ripropone, in un’ottica moderna, un problema dibattuto fin dall’antichità. I suoi termini più
essenziali, volendo semplificare le sue articolate
coordinate, sono riconducibili all’opposizione
tra lettera e spirito, che viene a configurarsi nel significato da attribuire al termine fedeltà in campo
traduttivo. Tale possibile bipolarità genera quesiti
che a loro volta consentono, oggi come ieri, risposte
varie e molteplici. È più giusta o più fedele la traduzione letterale o piuttosto quella che mira a rendere
lo spirito del testo, inserendolo in una cultura diversa per tempo e per luogo? Che cosa si intende per
senso vero della lettera? È possibile che tale verità
sia da cercare esclusivamente nella formulazione
linguistica del testo? Quale certezza si ha e si dà di
aver percepito lo spirito del testo nella sua più profonda essenza? E che cosa assicura che tale percezione non subisca l’influsso di una qualche forma di
soggettività?
The cultural debate that today animates research into
translation, presents again, from a modern point of
view, a problem that has been debated since ancient
times. Its most essential terms, seeking to simplify
its complex coordinates, can be traced back to the
opposition between word and spirit, which takes
expression in the meaning to be given to the term
fidelity in the translation field. This possible bipolarity raises questions that in their turn make possible, today as yesterday, various and multiple answers. Is a literal translation more correct or more
faithful rather than one that aims to render the spirit
of the text, inserting it into a culture that is different
in time and space? What do we mean by the real
meaning of the word? Is it possible that such truth is
to be searched for purely in the linguistic formulation of the text? What certainty do we have and do
we give of having perceived the spirit of the text in
its deepest essence? And what can ensure that this
perception is not affected by the influence of some
form of subjectivity?
p. 9
p. 9 (translated by Iain Halliday)
Faini’s book is entirely in Italian, apart from a few examples used for the “practical” translation exercises.
Tradurre is divided into eight chapters:
1. Definire il problema della traduzione; 2. Verso l’analisi testuale; 3. Il testo e la
tipologia testuale; 4. Adattamento del testo. Aspetti linguistici; 5. Adattamento
del testo. Aspetti culturali; 6. Il verbo. Problemi di tempo e di aspetto; 7. Problemi di traduzione letteraria; 8. Analisi testuale e pratica traduttiva
Here below, an interesting extract from a book by David Bellos first published in
2011 (Is That a Fish in Your Ear? The Amazing Adventure of Translation, 2012.
London: Penguin.)
6. Native Command: Is Your Language Really Yours?
Translators traditionally and now almost by iron rule translate from a foreign language into
what is called their mother tongue. In translation jargon this is called L1 translation, as
opposed to L2 translation, which is translation towards a learned or other tongue. But what
exactly is a mother tongue?
We all start with a mother and it seems obvious that we first learn language in her arms.
The language that your mother speaks to you is therefore what you are ‘born into’, which is all
that can be meant when instead of ‘mother tongue’ we call it a native language.
It is an axiom of language study that to be a native speaker is to have complete possession
of a language; reciprocally, complete possession of a language is usually glossed as precisely
that knowledge of a language that a native speaker has. In spite of the obvious fact that
speakers of the same language use it in infinitely varied ways and have often quite different
vocabularies and language habits at the levels of register, style, diction and so forth, we
proceed on the assumption that only native speakers of (let us say) English know English
completely and that only native speakers of English are in a position to judge whether any
other speaker is using the language ‘natively’.
We also know, from observation and self-observation too, that native speakers make
grammatical and lexical mistakes, and find themselves lost for words from time to time. In
what is now a conventional view of language use, the slips and stumbles in the speech of a
native speaker are themselves part of what it means to possess a language natively. Teachers
of foreign languages are expert in distinguishing between mistakes that language learners
make and those that are characteristic of native speech; and for a native speaker of any
language, there are some kinds of errors made by others that sound not just wrong, but not
native. But let us put these practical and effective uses of the distinction between ‘native’ and
‘non-native’ aside. Other, much more difficult issues are involved in using terms like ‘mother’
and ‘native’ to name the way we are more or less at home in the language we call our own.
We do not have to learn our mother tongue from a mother. It can be acquired just as effectively from siblings, from an au pair or from the kids next door. What matters for normal human development is that there be a language available in our immediate environment in infancy, for no child invents a language by itself, without input from outside. (57–58)
NOTES
class 19 of 21
It has come to my attention that some students think there will be
classes with me in the second semester
I have heard …
Some students told me …
in English these three dots are known as an ellipsis and they can
indicate either an omission or an intention to suspend the end of the
communiction, to allow the reader to infer the rest of the
communication
you will soon find some 12 hours’ worth of exercises available on
Studium, exercises that you have to bring to the oral exam (and
please refrain from copying them from colleagues)
How many of you are coming to the OFA party on Friday morning?
A show of hands, please.
why the reluctance to answer “yes” or “no”?
Why is the present perfect a pain in the neck for Italian native
speakers? Unfortunately the present perfect does exist in Italian in
terms of grammatical mechanism (auxiliary (present) + past
participle), which forms the Italian passato prossimo
present perfect – events that started in the past, but which still have
an effect in the present
one easy way of knowing whether to use pp or simple past in
English is to be aware of whether the moment in time when the
action started is defined … “yesterday”, “this morning”, “last
Friday”, “15 November”, “last year”
If I asked you to back-translate the text into Italian, you would
provide me with a series of differing translations
“equivalence” “fidelity” – chimerical notions / originally a
mythological monster, but now something that is impossible to reach
/ something unattainable
What do we mean by the real
meaning of the word? Is it
possible that such truth is to
be searched for purely in the
linguistic formulation of the
text?
The minute I ask you what you think about the above text I am
inviting you to elaborate on the words (and the grammar) it contains
– in other words, you can’t search for “truth” purely in the words,
because the words are always interpreted
And what can ensure that this
perception is not affected by
the influence of some form of
subjectivity?
The answer is, “nothing”. But there is one form of translation that
offers (an apparent) objectivity – automatic translation.
Maybe you don’t often use automatic translators because you all
have Babelfish in your ears. The Babelfish appears in The
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams.
One of the very first automatic translators available on the internet
was called “Babelfish” – Alta Vista
In any language there are L2 users who have competences that are
equivalent to, if not superior to, L1 speakers of the same language
(which, of course, depends on context).
you should be aspiring to call English, French, German, Spanish,
Russian “your own”, even if you are not (obviously) at native
speaker level
the concept of possession – “do you have English”? – an oldfashioned way of asking is someone speaks English
the truth is that you posses a language when you use it for some
purpose – the sooner you find that purpose, the better …
you have to look for the input, because it won’t be given to you on a
plate
for the most part they have achieved exposure “off their own bats”