Tarjima nazariyasi va amaliyoti fakulteti tarjima nazariyasi va amaliyoti kafedrasi

Chapter I. Theoretical bases of translation

1. 
   General characteristics of translation theory
   

As has often been the case in other areas of human activity, translation practice is far ahead of translation theory. The translation arose in connection with the public need for it, and the translator did their job more or less successfully, without waiting for an explanation of the translation from a theoretical point of view. The absence of theoretical works in the field of translation and the science itself, within the framework of which they could appear, did not mean that no attempts were made to reflect on the nature, goals, and methods of carrying out translation activities. In his work, the translator was constantly faced with the need to choose between different translation options, to decide what is most important in the translated text and should be necessarily transmitted, to give preference to one way or another way of overcoming the difficulties that arise. Although in most cases such a choice was made intuitively, still the translator sometimes tried to comprehend and explain his preferences. Often, such preferences were formulated in the form of “principles of translation”, which the translator set forth in the preface to his work, or defended later, often in response to criticisms addressed to him.
Thus, the first translation theorists were the translators themselves, who sought to generalize their own experience, and sometimes the experience of their other translators. It is clear that the most outstanding translators of all time spoke about their “translation credo”, and although the ideas expressed by them did not meet the modern requirements of scientific and evidence and did not add up to consistent theoretical concepts, a whole series of such considerations is of undoubted interest today.
So, even the translators of the ancient world widely discussed the question of the degree of proximity of the translation to the original. In early translations of the Bible or other works that were considered sacred or exemplary, the desire to literally copy the original prevailed, sometimes leading to ambiguity or even complete incomprehensibility of the translation. Therefore, later, some translators tried to theoretically justify the translator’s right to greater freedom in relation to the original, the need to reproduce not the letter, but the meaning or even the general impression, the “charm” of the original. Already in these first statements about the goals that the translator should set for himself, one can see the beginning of the theoretical debate of our time about the admissibility of a “literal” or “free” translation, about the need to preserve in the translation the same effect on the reader that the original has and etc.
Later, individual translators tried to formulate some semblance of a “normative theory of translation”, setting out a number of requirements that a good translation or a good translator had to meet. Etienne Dole³, a French translator, believed that a translator should abide by the following five basic principles of translation:
1) he must perfectly understand the content of the translated text and the intention of the author who is translating;
2) he must be fluent in the language from which he is translating, and equally well know the language into which he is translating;
3) the translator should avoid the tendency to translate word for word, for this would distort the content of the original and ruin the beauty of its form;
4) the translator must use common forms of speech in the translation;
5) choosing and arranging the words correctly, the translator must convey the general impression made by the original in the corresponding “tonality”.
In the book of the Englishman A. Tyler “Principles of Translation”⁴ the basic requirements for translation were formulated as follows:
1) the translation must completely betray the idea of ​​the original;
2) the style and manner of presentation of the translation should be the same as in the original;
3) the translation should be read as easily as the original works. Such requirements have not lost their significance, although today they seem to us self-evident.
The statement of the translators according to the principles which guided its work is of great interest and carefully studied by researchers of translation, but they do not constitute a coherent theory of translation and cannot substitute for such a theory.
The first attempts to justify the need for a scientific understanding of translation activities caused sharp objections from the translators themselves, who saw in them a desire to limit the freedom of translators’ creativity, to develop some norms and rules to which the translator would have to obey. They perceived the theory or science of translation as something fundamentally opposite or even hostile to the art of translation.
It was understood that translation theory is a set of rules that claim that having studied them, anyone can become an excellent translator. Professional translators considered such a claim to be both unnecessary and unjustified. They pointed out that talented translators created and are creating masterpieces of translation, having no understanding of any theory of translation and without needing it. And indeed no science of translation is possible, since translation is an art inaccessible to scientific division and analysis.
Similar objections to the scientific study of translation activities were clearly based on a misunderstanding. Literary activity is, undoubtedly, creativity, but on this basis one cannot refuse the right to exist to such a science as literary criticism. The thesis “Translation is not a science, but an art”, which was often put forward by translators, is clearly formulated incorrectly. Like any other practical activity, translation, of course, cannot be a “science”, that is, a theoretical description of itself.
And what does the statement that translation is art mean? What is usually called the art of translation belongs to the field of psychology of the translator, to his ability to carry out the translation process, create a complete translation text, make the right choice of language tools, given the totality of factors that affect the course and result of the translation. Individual translators have this ability to varying degrees, and the consideration of such factors is largely intuitive, as a result of a creative act. A high degree of such creative skill deserves the name of art. The creative nature of the translation activity does not mean, of course, that this activity itself or the factors influencing it cannot become the object of scientific analysis and theoretical description. The concept of “art of translation” refers to the ability to create a text of a translation, and not to the study of the essence of this process. The difficulty of such a study, as well as a theoretical study of any kind of mental and speech activity, does not in any way cast doubt on its fundamental possibility and necessity.
Translation theory is directly related to translation practice. Any theoretical concepts should be based on a description of the observed facts of the real translation process, generalize and explain these facts. In turn, the scientific theory of translation has an opposite effect on translation practice, facilitating and enriching it. This, of course, does not mean that any theoretical research must necessarily have a direct “exit” into practice, that any theoretical concepts can be directly used by the translator in his work. The connection between translation theory and translation practice can also be more complex, indirect. Any expansion of our knowledge of the processes of objective reality is of undoubted value, but not all knowledge can be used to control these processes. The effectiveness of interlanguage communication implies a significant degree of accuracy of translation, but in real translation practice this requirement is met to a different extent depending on many objective and subjective factors.

2.2. Types of translation

Translation is the process of transforming of a message in the source language into a message in the target language. Accurate translation, by definition, is impossible already due to the fact that different languages ​​differ both in grammatical structure and in the simple number of words, not to mention the difference in cultures, which can also affect the methods and results of translation. When translating, the translator, first of all, determines the method of translation, that is, the measure of information order for the translated text. The first step in choosing a method of ordering is to determine in what form the source text in the translating culture should be presented: in full or in part. Depending on the communicative task, either full or abbreviated translation is selected at this stage (referred to as abstract in some sources).
Translation can occur both in written and in oral form. Translation is kind of fixed (mainly written) texts that a translator can repeatedly refer, deepening their understanding of the original and adjusting the selected transfer options. This situation allows for greater fidelity of the original, allowing the translator to use different dictionaries and reference books, ask for help from professionals. Carefully edit the translation. For the interpretation of the original and the translation are in the process of translation into non-fixed (oral) form, which determines the one-time perception by the interpreter of the segments of the original and the impossibility of subsequent comparison or correction of the translation after scoring. Interpretation can be performed sequentially after the speaker uttering his speech or any part thereof or synchronously, i.e. simultaneously with speech of speaker. A special type of oral translation is the translation of conversations or two-way translation, when the interpreter alternately uses each of the languages as a target language. There are also mixed types of translation: oral translation of a written text (a”sight translation”) and translation of the tape recording of oral presentations.
The kind of interpreting where speech is translated consistently, i.e. when the interpreter sees a certain segment of speech and using the shortest possible time plays it in the translation is called consecutive translation. It is sketchy, and the interpreter would be replaced as the speaker, speaking over him and being the center of attention of the audience.
Consecutive translation (without recording) (consecutive translation) of conversations, interviews, negotiations is used when exchanging relatively concise statements that do not require the use of translation cursive writing.
Consecutive translation (with recording) is used during important negotiations, official meetings on political, economic, financial, legal and other issues. During lectures, speeches, speeches, press conferences, meetings with the press, seminars, round tables, etc. Consecutive translation with recording is a more complex type of interpretation. He requires the translator to have even higher professionalism, a deep knowledge of the topic, appropriate psychological preparation, self-confidence and calmness. The level of adequacy of the translation increases accordingly, because it is necessary to convey not only the content, but also the form.
Simultaneous translation is a responsible and rather difficult area in interpretation. This type of translation requires the translator to have special and unique skills and abilities, as well as extensive work experience.
Simultaneous translation involves the provision of text materials. For the success of simultaneous interpretation, it is necessary to study in advance as deeply as possible what will be discussed, the need for improvisation in this case should be minimized, since simultaneous translation does not imply either the availability of time for the translator to think over phrases, or the possibility of clarifying what was heard. This distinguishes simultaneous translation from consecutive translation.
Using simultaneous translation technologies, events such as conferences, seminars, forums, and presentations can be organized. Behind the apparent simplicity here lies a long and complex process of training, attracting specialists qualified in various fields of science and technology, starting with engineers and ending with copywriters and scriptwriters. A huge number of nuances and many other circumstances require the most professional approach and extensive experience in conducting such events. A certain kind of negligence can adversely affect the achievement of tasks.