|
Text processing and creation in the contrastive discourse model
According to Abdul-Fettah Jabr (2001: 308), Hatim and Mason (1990) (1997) “seem to regard the translation process as one that is identical to that of text creation and processing” by language users in general. If this is so, then a comparison of the activity of these two actors (translators and language users in general) can only enhance our understanding of what is
involved in the translation operation. For this purpose, a comparison will follow in which both text processing and text creation will be looked at first from the perspective of language users in general and second from the perspective of translators.
Text processing by readers/hearers:
In his reading process, the reader starts with words, phrases and sentences (i.e. the lexico-grammar) in order to get to (i.e. re-create) the intended meaning of the text. In this respect, the three dimensions of context are brought to bear on the processing operation. Thus, the register membership of a text is identified through an analysis of field, tenor and mode (a communicative dimension), its global intention is inferred (a pragmatic dimension) and finally, its status as an instance of a genre, of a
particular discourse and of a certain text type (a semiotic dimension) is recognised. In this “sense-making” effort, a two-way reading process is involved, namely, top-down reading and bottom-up reading.
Concerning the top-down reading process, the reader feeds his own assumptions into the text. These assumptions are derived from his or her knowledge of the world. As for the bottom-up process, the reader analyzes the text elements in terms of their lexical meanings (5) and relates them to one another using the rules of syntax. This leads to the “building-up of composite meaning as reading proceeds” (Hatim and Mason 1990: 226). The two reading processes are said to take place simultaneously, that is there is an interaction between them; the one informs and is being informed by the other (Ibid).
Text processing by the translator
Unlike the ordinary reader, the translator has to process the text much more thoroughly in order to get to the intended meaning. In this context,
Hatim and Mason state that
whereas most readers are content to follow the thread of discourse as it proceeds, translators are constantly aware of the need to reconstruct the entire text from the individual fragments. Then, and only then, are translators in a position to mediate between ST and TT reader. (1990: 226)
Moreover, the translator’s processing of discourse in the contrastive discourse model differs from that of previous translators in that it uses top- down and bottom-up processes simultaneously; whereas former models used contextual factors only after identifying problems at the bottom level. Concerning this point, Hatim and Mason state:
While not losing sight of the micro-analysis which is constantly going on in the translator’s mind, we shall trace the path from context, through structure to texture in order to bring out the communicative, pragmatic and semiotic values which influence translators’ decisions… (1990: 227)
Text creation by writers/speakers:
During the creation process, the writer/speaker selects those lexico- grammatical elements which express his intended meaning; this could be to narrate, to argue, to describe or just to present information. Building on this, texture and structure are added, taking into account the communicative and the semiotic dimensions.
Target text creation:
Likewise, the translator selects those lexico-grammatical elements which allow for the expression of the overall intended meaning or rhetorical purpose of the ST. This involves establishing register equivalence (finding the appropriate equivalent vocabulary for a particular field, and using the right tenor and mode in the TL). The process also involves choosing the appropriate text structure that will reflect the overall rhetorical purpose (such as thesis cited to be opposed, opposition, substantiation and conclusion for the counter argumentative global intention). In addition to this, the translator has to string words, phrases and sentences together to form sequences, making use of cohesion, coherence and thematic patterns. These devices constitute the textual features and are themselves influenced by the text structure and other higher level contextual features. While he is engaged in the process of text creation through mediation (or intersemiotic process), the translator
has to mediate between cultures, seeking to overcome their incompatibilities (ideologies, moral systems and socio-political structures ) (Ibid: 224).
This is due to the fact that generic and discoursal traditions are not the same for source and target languages. At the same time, the translator has to make sure that the ST is rendered “untainted by his own vision of reality” (Ibid).
The last stage in the translator’s text creation is to execute a set of final adjustments which take account of the text receivers’ expectations (Ibid).
To sum up, text processing and creation as performed by language users in general and translators in particular can be represented as follows:
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
