Page 69 - Translation Journal July 2015
P. 69
1. Translation by a more general word: This is one of the most common strategies to deal with many types of nonequivalence.
This, she says, is “one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalents, particularly in the area of
propositional meaning” (Baker, 1992: 26). As Baker believes, it works appropriately in most, if not all, languages, because in the
semantic field, meaning is not language dependent.
2. Translation by a more neutral/ less expressive word: This is another strategy in the semantic field of structure.
3. Translation by cultural substitution: This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a TL item considering
its impact on the target reader. This strategy makes the translated text more natural, more understandable and more familiar to
the target reader. The translator’s decision to use this strategy will depend on:
a) The degree to which the translator is given license by those who commission the translation
b) The purpose of the translation
4. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation:
This strategy is usually used in dealing with culture-specific items, modern concepts, and buzz words. Using the loan word with
an explanation is very useful when a word is repeated several times in the text. At the first time the word is mentioned by the
explanation and in the next times the word can be used by its own.
5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word:
This strategy is used when the source item in lexicalized in the TL but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a
certain form is used in the source text is obviously higher than it would be natural in the TL.
6. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words: The paraphrase strategy can be used when the concept in the source item is
not lexicalized in the TL. When the meaning of the source item is complex in the TL, the paraphrase strategy may be used instead
of using related words; it may be based on modifying a super-ordinate or simply on making clear the meaning of the source item.
7. Translation by omission: This may be a drastic kind of strategy, but in fact it may be even useful to omit translating a word or
expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not necessary to mention in the
understanding of the translation, translators use this strategy to avoid lengthy explanations. There are various reasons for this to
happen, for instance, when the omission of such a word or expression does not hamper the meaning of the source text.
8. Translation by illustration: This strategy can be useful when the target equivalent item does not cover some aspects of the source
item and the equivalent item refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly in order to avoid over-explanation and
to be concise and to the point.
5. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
The researcher selected “A Glossary Of Literary Terms” translated by
Sabzian (2009). The book contains technical terms for the Persian speaking students, researchers, and lexicographers in the field of
literature. It was beyond the scope of this study to analyze the whole text of the book, so the researcher only concentrated on the
translation of the main entries which are used by literature specialists and students as keywords.
There were totally 228 entries. Some of the entries had more than one equivalent. The researcher observed only the first equivalents in
order to have more accurate results.
It is obvious that there are different translation strategies, but in this study the researcher just focused on Baker’s strategies used in
translating the above mentioned book.
In this process, the researcher investigated Baker’s taxonomy on the translation of the entries of the book and their equivalents but
not the explanations. The researcher asked two raters to evaluate the equivalents on the basis of Baker’s strategies for more reliable
statistics.
6. Significance of the Study
The significance of this study was to analyze what Baker’s translation strategies were mostly applied by the translator in translating the
literary technical terms of Abrams’s “A Glossary Of Literary Terms” (2008).
The findings of this research will be useful for technical translators, lexicographers and students of translation studies. Moreover, individuals
who are interested in translation may be motivated and would gain ideas about the translation strategies and the reasons of why those
strategies were used.
7. Corpus
The corpora of this research were two books. The monolingual corpus was the ninth edition of “A glossary Of Literary Terms” written
by M. H. Abrams and Geoffrey Galt Harpham, published by Rahnama in 2008, in 393 pages. This book defines and discusses terms,
critical theories, and points of views that are commonly applied in classifying, analyzing, interpreting, and writing the history of works of
literature. The component entries, together with the guides to further reading included in most of them, are oriented especially toward
Translation Journal - July 2015 | 69
This, she says, is “one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalents, particularly in the area of
propositional meaning” (Baker, 1992: 26). As Baker believes, it works appropriately in most, if not all, languages, because in the
semantic field, meaning is not language dependent.
2. Translation by a more neutral/ less expressive word: This is another strategy in the semantic field of structure.
3. Translation by cultural substitution: This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a TL item considering
its impact on the target reader. This strategy makes the translated text more natural, more understandable and more familiar to
the target reader. The translator’s decision to use this strategy will depend on:
a) The degree to which the translator is given license by those who commission the translation
b) The purpose of the translation
4. Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation:
This strategy is usually used in dealing with culture-specific items, modern concepts, and buzz words. Using the loan word with
an explanation is very useful when a word is repeated several times in the text. At the first time the word is mentioned by the
explanation and in the next times the word can be used by its own.
5. Translation by paraphrase using a related word:
This strategy is used when the source item in lexicalized in the TL but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a
certain form is used in the source text is obviously higher than it would be natural in the TL.
6. Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words: The paraphrase strategy can be used when the concept in the source item is
not lexicalized in the TL. When the meaning of the source item is complex in the TL, the paraphrase strategy may be used instead
of using related words; it may be based on modifying a super-ordinate or simply on making clear the meaning of the source item.
7. Translation by omission: This may be a drastic kind of strategy, but in fact it may be even useful to omit translating a word or
expression in some contexts. If the meaning conveyed by a particular item or expression is not necessary to mention in the
understanding of the translation, translators use this strategy to avoid lengthy explanations. There are various reasons for this to
happen, for instance, when the omission of such a word or expression does not hamper the meaning of the source text.
8. Translation by illustration: This strategy can be useful when the target equivalent item does not cover some aspects of the source
item and the equivalent item refers to a physical entity which can be illustrated, particularly in order to avoid over-explanation and
to be concise and to the point.
5. Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
The researcher selected “A Glossary Of Literary Terms” translated by
Sabzian (2009). The book contains technical terms for the Persian speaking students, researchers, and lexicographers in the field of
literature. It was beyond the scope of this study to analyze the whole text of the book, so the researcher only concentrated on the
translation of the main entries which are used by literature specialists and students as keywords.
There were totally 228 entries. Some of the entries had more than one equivalent. The researcher observed only the first equivalents in
order to have more accurate results.
It is obvious that there are different translation strategies, but in this study the researcher just focused on Baker’s strategies used in
translating the above mentioned book.
In this process, the researcher investigated Baker’s taxonomy on the translation of the entries of the book and their equivalents but
not the explanations. The researcher asked two raters to evaluate the equivalents on the basis of Baker’s strategies for more reliable
statistics.
6. Significance of the Study
The significance of this study was to analyze what Baker’s translation strategies were mostly applied by the translator in translating the
literary technical terms of Abrams’s “A Glossary Of Literary Terms” (2008).
The findings of this research will be useful for technical translators, lexicographers and students of translation studies. Moreover, individuals
who are interested in translation may be motivated and would gain ideas about the translation strategies and the reasons of why those
strategies were used.
7. Corpus
The corpora of this research were two books. The monolingual corpus was the ninth edition of “A glossary Of Literary Terms” written
by M. H. Abrams and Geoffrey Galt Harpham, published by Rahnama in 2008, in 393 pages. This book defines and discusses terms,
critical theories, and points of views that are commonly applied in classifying, analyzing, interpreting, and writing the history of works of
literature. The component entries, together with the guides to further reading included in most of them, are oriented especially toward
Translation Journal - July 2015 | 69
