: Discourse and the Translator (Language In Social Life) ( ): B. Hatim, Ian Mason: Books. Discourse and the Translator is a book for people interested in the linguistic presented to support Hatim and Mason’s main idea, that is, to relate discourse. Documents Similar To Hatim B Mason – Discourse and the Translator. Mona Baker Encylopedia of Translation Studies. Uploaded by. api Translation.
|Published (Last):||5 July 2010|
|PDF File Size:||10.67 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.17 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Skip to main content. Log In Sign Up. Discourse and the translator, Basil Hatim and Ian Mason. Our interactions, thought seem quite mechanical and instinctive, are acts of translation per say.
What does such an tbe involve was the center of attention of this book. Discourse and the translator gave birth to a new practical model that analyzes the cultural dimensions of trasnlator, as well as the pragmatic and semiotic dimensions of translation.
Mason and Hatim investigate the bound that ties discourse analysis to translation, with a notable inclination toward the linguistic side. For this reason, a previous knowledge of linguistics and of theory of translation is needed diacourse that the hatimm can understand the concepts mentioned inside. The purpose of this review was an attempt to withdraw and secede, to break free from this unfruitful reasoning. Then the authors, in chapter two, reveal the fertile insights that linguistics offered to this discipline.
All the progress linguistics has made have provided a new direction for translation studies. Translation studies, hence, have passed to a haim new level now considering the systematic communicative factors that exists between distinct languages. It is only in this light that issues like the impossibility and the limits of translation and equivalence will reasonably be defined and elucidated. After that, the study of context is launched, beginning with the analysis of register in chapter three.
Hatim and Mason in their examination, rely on the anthropological theory of Malinowski, and the linguistic one taken from Firth. The first tackled the issue of context of situation and culture, raising a very important question to examine: Of course, it was the cultural substance which posed a problem for the translator, and it was translation with commentary that stood up in the end.
Firth, on the other hand, explored the relationship that exists between meaning and language variation. He stated that it was far from being accurate to say that understanding the meaning of an utterance is understanding hhe words individually.
Meaning, he says, is the batim message. The textual meaning comes from the meaning of its words gathered all together as an entity that cannot be fragmented.
Discourse and the Translator
Therefore, he proposes four levels of meaning to make it easier for the translator to have a clearer distinction, since each contributes to assist or hinder his task. However, this haim far from being the bottom of the problem.
According to Catford, the concept of language is very vast and is not operationally useful; it engendered translayor debates all over the years.
For this matter, Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens created a framework for the description of language variation illustrating by that the communicative aspect of language in a very simplistic but adept way. Two dimensions are distinguished: And it is the semiotic dimension that enables us to define discourse, in view of the fact that social occasions are expressed in discourse.
Such a perception of tue leads us to conclude that the transfer of the any message into another system of language is, in every respect, depending on such values to be put right. In the same chapter they make distinction between text and discourse, but this distinction is very shadowy.
Text is described as meanings and manifestations of discourses, and consequently regarded as the basic unit for semiotic analysis.
This brought up some intriguing questions to my mind, for instance, how could this definition be useful for our practice? How is the term discourse appropriate in theoretical basis and not functional in translation studies? Additionally, he does not refer to the product of translation as discourse. Or does it in reality exclude the written aspect?
Discourse and the translator – Basil Hatim, Ian Mason – Google Books
Plus, if any transltaor and structurally coherent, completed piece of language considered as text, what would discourse be then? If discourse as explained in figure 4. If so, is the communicated meaning attributed to discourse only?
In chapter five, six and seven, Hatim and his colleague come up with an interesting viewpoint.
The Pragmatic and semiotic features combined form what they call intertextuality. The authors in this section of the book explain how our previous associations, which come from our previous experiences, and the existing relationship trandlator the elements of the text, are what create this strong intertextual link that give rise to knowledge way beyond that of the text in hand.
So far, this book tackles the difficulty translators face all along their career which enfolds essentially intentionality and interpretation. The two authors confidently affirm that every text has a specific rhetorical purpose directly related to content, stressing by that the significance of the ideologies texts reflect for practitioners.
After a great detailed examination of aspects of texts, the two scholars turn their attention in chapter eight tganslator the focus of the translator, the text type.
In chapter nine, however, the influence of context on the structure of a text is questioned. They submit that the lexical choice and the structure of a particular text type are motivated, i. Texts are then mere representations influenced by intentionality.
It is agreed that this is not an easy task to achieve as it demands a profound understanding, a piquant perception and an awareness of its function. Yet, if he ever could hhe to do that, he is then requested to find a structure and lexis which conforms to the norms translatlr the target culture and its system of the language which rranslator again not that easy to realize.
Chapter ten entitled Discourse texture, deal with the traits attributed to discourse. This in effect means that texture provide the translator with means to apprehend the intentions of the discourse and the function structure exerts in any given text plan. And that was one of the wins that we, readers of this book, enormously benefited from. The translator, previously irritated for being called traitor, turns out to be mediator in the end of this paperback!
This is why an intercultural speaker, in this case a translator, is needed for this skill enables him to mediate between and interact with other speakers of radically different backgrounds freely without encountering trouble. A mediator, in this respect, acts as a go-between distinct languages and cultures, each of which regards translatod differently. Because he is the one who commands the process of message exchanging between the sender and the receiver, tganslator unconsciously performs a ternary action, znd.
Then, decodes the intended meaning, and afterwards, rewrites it by re-encoding it again, taking into account how critical it is for the rhetorical purpose of the source text to remain intact. The nature of the relationship between discourse analysis and translation is now clearer.
Remember me on this computer. Enter the email address you signed up with and we’ll email you a reset link. Click here to sign up. Help Center Find new research papers in: