43016 (Text analysis in translation), страница 6

Although the motive for communication is closely linked with the dimension of time, the two factors must not be confused. While the dimension of time is part of the communicative situation (in the narrower sense), the dimension of motive relates the communicative situation and the participants to an event that is outside, or rather prior to, the situation.

It is not always easy therefore (and not always relevant to translation!) to find out which event has motivated a certain text. Sometimes the motive is referred to in the text or mentioned in the text environment (e.g. in the title: To Honor Roman Jakobson on the Occasion of his 70th Birthda); but there are communicative situations in which the motive is only an indirect reason for the author to deal with a loosely connected subject.

Example

On March 12th, 1984, the Spanish daily paper El Pais published a commentary under the title "El Dfa de la Mujer" (International Women's Day). It is the motive for text production this title alludes to and not the subject matter, because the text deals with the situation of working women in Spain in 1984. The newspaper reader was expected to be familiar with the occasion, International Women's Day, since it had been commented on quite frequently at the time. If the text is to be translated, it is the motive for translation (as well as the dimensions of time and place) that has to be taken into account. Only a few days later the date will have been pushed into the background by other events, and a title like "International Women's Day" will arouse specific expectations about the subject matter, which the text cannot meet.

As is illustrated by the example, the dimension of motive is of as much interest to the translator as that of time, because s/he has to contrast the motive for ST production with the motive for TT production and find out the impact this contrast has on the transfer decisions. While the motive for ST production is often to be found in the "environment" of the sender or text producer, the motive for TT production can be inferred from what is known about the transfer situation, i.e. the initiator and the translation brief. The effect of the motive on intra-textual features - as opposed to that of the dimension of time - is often merely an indirect one.

We can restate that the clues as to the motive or motive type are to be inferred from certain situational factors, such as medium (e.g. political section of a newspaper), place and time (in connection with the receiver's general background knowledge), and, of course, text function, if this is specified by unambiguous pre-signals, such as genre designations (e.g. "protocol") or text-type features (e.g. black edging). The information obtained on the sender and the intention usually permits only indirect conclusions as to the motive for communication.

Checklist

The following questions may help to find out the relevant information about the motive for communication:

1. Why was the text written or transmitted? Is there any information on the motive of communication to be found in the text environment? Is the ST receiver expected to be familiar with the motive?

2. Was the text written for a special occasion? Is the text intended to be read or heard more than once or regularly?

3. What clues as to the motive for communication can be inferred from other extratextual dimensions (sender, intention, receiver, medium, place, time, function)?

4. What conclusions can be drawn from the data and clues obtained about the motive for communication as regards

1. other extratextual factors (expectations of the receiver, sender and intention), and

2. the intratextual features?

5. What problems can arise from the difference between the motive for ST production and the motive for translation?

Text function

The relationship between text function and genre

Let me briefly restate that the notion of text function means the communicative function, or the combination of communicative functions, which a text fulfils in its concrete situation of production/reception. It is derived from the specific configuration of extratextual factors (sender/sender's role, intention, receiver/receiver's expectation, medium, place, time, and motive). The notion of text function is related to the situational aspect of communication, whereas the notion of genre is related to the structural aspect of the text-in-function. It is like looking at the two sides of a coin: they cannot be separated, but they are not the identical.

As was pointed out above, text can be classified on various levels of generalization. It is therefore not surprising that some authors specify text types as "newspaper reports", "sermons", or "resolutions", while others prefer a more general categorisation into "informative", "expressive", or "operative" texts.

Literariness as a text function

The notion of text function as a particular configuration of situational factors can be illustrated by the special function of literary texts. The senders of a literary text are usually individual authors who are also text producers and who in the literary context are known as "writers". Their intention is not to describe "reality", but to motivate personal insights about reality by describing an (alternative) fictitious world. Literary texts are primarily addressed to receivers who have a specific expectation determined by their literary experience, and a certain command of the literary code. As a rule, literary texts are transmitted in writing (= medium), although sometimes orally transmitted texts (such as fairy tales) are included in literature as well. The situational factors (place, time, motive) may not be of great significance in intracultural literary communication but they do play an important part in literary translation because they convey the culture-specific characteristics of both the source and the target situation.

The importance of ST function for translation

The basic principle of functionalism in translation is the orientation towards the (prospective) function of the target text. Since I have argued that a change of function is the normal case, and the preservation of function the special case in the process of intercultural text transfer.

If a translation is an offer of information about the source text, there can be two fundamental kinds of relationship between source and target text. Here again we find the two translation theories which have split translation scholars into two camps: the supporters of liberty and the adherents to fidelity. The target text can be (a) a document of a past communicative action in which an SC sender made an offer of information to an SC receiver by means of the source text, and (b) an instrument in a new TC communicative action, in which a TC receiver receives an offer of information for which the ST provides the material. Accordingly, we can distinguish between two translation "types": documentary and instrumental translation.

Documentary translations (such as word-for-word translation, literal translation) serve as a document of an SC communication between the author and the ST receiver, whereas the instrumental translation is a communicative instrument in its own right, conveying a message directly from the ST author to the TT receiver. An instrumental translation can have the same or a similar or analogous function as the ST.

In a documentary translation, certain aspects of the ST or the whole ST-in-situation are reproduced for the TT receivers, who is conscious of "observing" a communicative situation of which they are not a part. A documentary translation can focus on any of the features on each rank of the source text, pushing others into the background. In a word-for-word translation, for example, which aims to reproduce the features of the source language system, the focus is on the morphological, lexical, and syntactic structures presented in the source text, whereas textuality is bound to be neglected.

An instrumental translation, on the other hand, serves as an independent message-transmitting instrument in a new communicative action in TC, and is intended to fulfill its communicative purpose without the receiver being aware of reading or hearing a text which, in a different form, was used before in a different communicative action. This translation type comprises three forms. First, if the target text can fulfill the same function(s) as the source text, we speak of an "equi-functional" translation (used, for example, in the case of operating instructions or business correspondence). Second, if the ST functions cannot be realized as such by the TT receiver, they may be adapted by the translator, provided that the TT functions are compatible with the ST functions and do not offend against the sender's intention (e.g. the translation of Swift's Gulliver s Travels for children). This form is referred to as "heterofunctional translation". The third form is intended to achieve a similar effect by reproducing in the TC literary context the function the ST has in its own SC literary context. This form is often found in the translation of poetry.

How to obtain information about text function

The most important source of information is, again, the text environment, since designations like "operating instructions" or "anecdote" call on the receivers' reading experience of the text type in question and build up a specific expectation as to text function(s). It is obvious that these "labels" can be misleading if they are used inadequately by the author or sender (whether intentionally or unintentionally). On the other hand, it may be assumed that in normal communication such designations are in fact intended as a guideline for the receiver.

If there is no genre designation, the text function or functions have to be inferred from the configuration of the external factors. This is why text function should be analysed last when as much information as possible is available. As was illustrated by the example of literary texts, the intention of the sender and the expectations of the receiver are the crucial dimensions in this respect. However, other factors may also narrow the range of possible functions, such as sender (e.g. a candidate for presidency), medium and place (e.g. a public speech in the market place of a mountain village), time (e.g. shortly before the general elections), and motive (e.g. an election campaign).

The pragmatic relationships between sender, receiver, medium, and motive, provide the translator with a number of pre-signals announcing a particular function, which will be either confirmed or rejected by the subsequent analysis of the intratextual features. If the translator finds his or her expectations confirmed, s/he has reason to believe that s/he has elicited the correct function - if not, there are two possible explanations: either the author has intentionally violated the norms and conventions of the text type, or the translator has interpreted the pre-signals wrongly and therefore has to go through the process of eliciting the text function on the basis of pragmatic pre-signals again.

Checklist

The following questions may help to find out the relevant information about text function:

1. What is the text function intended by the sender? Are there any hints as to the intended function in the text environment, such as text-type designations?

2. What clues as to the function of the text can be inferred from other extratextual dimensions (motive, medium, receiver, intention)?

1. Are there any indications that the receiver may use the text in a function other than that intended by the sender?

4. What conclusions can be drawn from the data and clues obtained about text function as regards

1. other extratextual dimensions (sender, intention, receiver, medium, time, place, and motive), and

2. the intratextual features?

The interdependence of extratextual factors

The checklist questions suggested in connection with the extratextual factors illustrate the interdependence of the extratextual factors on the one hand, and of the extratextual and intratextual factors (which have so far not been specified), on the other. Data and clues about a single factor can be derived from the data and clues obtained about the other factors.

The most important principle, however, is that of recursiveness. This type of analysis is no one-way process, but contains any number of loops, in which expectations are built up, confirmed, or rejected, and where knowledge is gained and extended and understanding constantly modified. This applies not only to the analysis of the text as a whole and to the individual text factors but also, if the analysis and translation of microstructures leads incidentally to new discoveries requiring previous transfer decisions to be corrected, to the processing of smaller text units such as chapters or even paragraphs.

The interdependence of the extratextual factors is illustrated by a diagram (Figure 5), in which arrows are used to show the course of the analytical procedure. Those steps which yield reliable data are depicted by a continuous line, while the steps which merely lead to clues are represented by a dotted line.