TRST 60010: Theory of Translation and InterpretingWeek 3- Functionalist approaches

Institute for Applied Linguistics (Translation)Modern and Classical Language Studies

Kent State University- Fall 2007

Erik Angelone

Transitioning from equivalence theories to functionalist theories

For review purposes, how did we define equivalence effect and what was its major shortcoming in determining “adequate” translation?

Functionalist approaches: Transcend beyond linguistics-driven “translation units” and comparative

analysis and the word or sentence level, examining the text as a macro-level entity centered around a given function or purpose, as determined by the target text and the translation initiator.

The hypothesis: What is important is not equivalence with the source text, but fulfilling the function that the client wants the target text to have, even if that differs from the source text’s function.

What are some examples of TTs having a different function than the STs?

Main points of functionalist approaches

TT more central than ST and its author; transformations are TT-driven Translator preserves only that information in the ST critical for ensuring

the TT fulfills its intended function in the TL TT (pragmatic varieties) expected to function as an autonomous,

independent texts, not recognizable as a translation Do you see any problems with this? The TT is not to be regarded as subordinate to the ST Advocates claim that functional approaches apply to both pragmatic

and non-pragmatic texts (e.g., literary texts, philosophical texts, authoritative texts such as the Bible or the Constitution)

Would you agree with this? Why or why not?

The notion of text types

Reiss notion of text type is centered around the communicative function and focus of texts at the macro-level

Three primary text types:1. informative texts = communication of objective factual information;

topic-centeredExamples? 2. expressive texts = “creative communication” using aesthetics; author

and form-centeredExamples?3. operative texts = induce behavioral responses; appellative; receiver-

centeredExamples?

Contextualizing text-type functional approaches

• In groups of 4 or 5, discuss what modifications would need to be made in your given language directions to ensure appropriate function (skopos) in the TL (English). Are the modifications primarily linguistic (equivalence) or communicative (functional)?

Informative text exampleUniversity grading parameters

Expressive text examplePoem

Operative text example Car advertisement

Assessing adequacy of a text-type functional approach

Reiss outlines two parameters:1. Intralinguistic criteria semantic, lexical, grammatical and stylistic features2. Extralinguistic criteria = CONTEXT situation, subject field, time, place, receiver, sender, affect

Despite intralinguistic criteria seeming to overlap with equivalence-based approaches to translation, keep in mind that FUNCTION still outweighs “equivalence”, defined from linguistic and “effect” stances.

Text type will have an impact on which criteria are primary and which are secondary. Which genres will focus more on intralinguistic criteria and which will focus more on extralinguistic criteria?

Skopos theory (Vermeer)

skopos = Greek = aim or purpose Function as determined by what the TT is going to be used for

Some key principles of skopos theory:• -a translatum (TT) is determined by its skopos.• -information change from ST to TT is not (necessarily) reversible.• -a TT must be internally coherentWhat does this imply in relation to the theories we have discussed? • -a TT must be coherent with its ST • note: these principles are hierarchical in nature; last point is least

prioritized = what does this imply?> FUNCTION over FORM

Translational action (Holz-Mänttäri)

Translational action The collaborative processes and interplay leading to a functionally-adequate

TT Views translation as purpose-driven and outcome-oriented Who is involved?• initiator = company or individual who needs the translation• commissioner = individual who contracts the translator• the ST producer• the TT producer = the translator• the TT user = used for instruction, sales, comparative purposes, etc.• the TT receiver

What do the notions of collaboration and interplay imply? Who ultimately determines functional adequacy? How does this vary from text

to text?

Some criticisms of functional approaches

• If equivalence is no longer the goal and a translation may differ radically from the source text, what makes the translation a translation? Functional approaches go beyond the limits of translation proper, potentially resulting in ‘adaptations’, ‘versions’ or ‘rewriting’.

• The source text plays almost no role in this model.

• It emphasizes function at the expense of the formal dimension, richness of meaning, and micro-level lexical, syntactic, and stylistic aspects.

• If a text can have as many functions as it has recipients, absolute evaluation standards are impossible.

• Functionalist approaches adopt domestication (adaptation to the needs of the target audience) “as a default translation strategy” (Kwiecinski 1998, 186), but domestication can be problematic (see later weeks).

Some extension discussion questions

• How valid or necessary is functional invariance in the case of STs that are not heavily reliant on the SL and SC for their relevance (e.g., journalistic texts or technical material?) What about texts that do rely heavily on linguistic and cultural aspects specific to the source culture?

• “When and how is it ethical or professional to improve a badly written ST in translation? Are there limits to the improvements that the translator can ethically make? […] Is there a limit to the improvements a translator should make without calling the client or agency for approval? A reliable translator is someone who on the one hand doesn’t make unauthorized changes- but who on the other hand doesn’t pester the client or agency with queries about every minute little detail.

• Lets discuss one in class, the other will be posted for discussion on Vista

Questions or comments?

Homework for this week: Quiz 3 on Vista (posted tomorrow evening) Read week 4 handout (posted Saturday) Read Munday, pages 92-99 only Begin thinking about ways to synthesize ideas for first written

assignment Have study groups been formed? Post days and times on Vista if so