A Linguistic Theory of Translation (Language and Language Learning) [J.C. Catford] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. A Linguistic Theory of Translation: An Essay in Applied Linguistics. Front Cover. J. C. Catford. Oxford University Press, – Linguistics – pages. Get this from a library! A linguistic theory of translation, by j.c. catford.. [J c Catford].
|Published (Last):||3 July 2017|
|PDF File Size:||10.53 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
H headM modifier and Q, qualifier. In this particular example from Colette there is, as Weightman points out, linguistid degree of untranslatability. The linguist, however, cannot let the matter rest there. Michael Darroch – – Flusser Studies 6 1. No English garment, for instance, is worn both in bed and in the street except in emergencies and certainly no garment is supplied by English hotels to trqnslation guests. Lynn June rated it really liked it Sep 23, John the Baptist, people who live in glass houses, etc.
It can be shifted from one foot to another, and such shifts are changes of tonicity. To deal with this, we make use of the concept of rank-shift. In such a case, the same effect of explicit, contrastive, reference to completion may have to be translated into English by a change of lexical item.
He has wide and varied teaching experience, having worked for several years for the British Council in Greece, Egypt, and Palestine, and subsequently in the Universitie From back flap of “A Practicaln Introduction to Phonetics”: The overt language-behaviour described above is causally related to various other features of the situation in which it occurs.
But no Lingujstic item is relatable to the full range of situational features, and there are likely to be texts where no possible English ilnguistic equivalent w. HC — me, Q has 4 common features. In grammar this may be the relation between units of different rank in the grammatical hier- 1 Locke and Booth Machine Translation of Languages New York, Londonp. Category-shifts are departures from formal correspondence in translation.
The elements of tone-group structure are T tonic which is always present, linguistid P pretonic which may be absent. Structure, as we have said, is stated in terms of ordered arrangements in which linear sequence often is, but need not always be, a translaation of elements: This, like the previous type of ambiguity, is illustrated in The translator supplies the equivalent Mon JUs.
This entry has no external links.
A Linguistic Theory of Translation
First, the TL equivalent is seldom related to exactly the same set of substance-features as the SL item. But this clearly pushes lingustic problem of justifying our statement of formal correspondence further up the rank scale; we still have to justify the correspond- ence of nominal groups, adjuncts, etc. The distinction between transliteration and transcription is important, and often misunderstood.
Something is said about the relevance j.c.catfoord wider or more peripheral situational features in the chapters on Language Varieties in Translation and The Limits of Translatability 13 and 14 below. This is why translation equivalence can nearly always be established at sentence-rank — the sentence is the grammatical unit most directly related to speech-function within a situation.
Only three of these a speaker, an arrival and a prior event were common to both. In the Russian text, therefore, there is no translation equivalent of the English indefinite article.
This, then, is the textual equivalent of My son is six. For English, J.f.catford Joos has suggested five styles: Nevertheless, commutation is the ultimate test for textual equivalence, and it is useful in cases where equivalence is not of the simple equal-rank and unit-to-unit type illustrated linguistuc.
For typographic reasons some slight transcriptional alterations have kf made here. This article has no associated abstract. For many users of English cannot is characteristically a written rather than a spoken form. Even within one and the same language, democracymay be relatable to some different situational features in the registers of different political parties.
Translation, as a process, is always uni-directional: Did you steal a horse? In either case the description is unmanageably vast. Thus Yes with, say, falling tone is a tone-group, consisting of one foot.
J d a linguistic theory of translation PDF | Damian Grzech –
One notable point, however, is that literal translation, like word-for- word, tends to remain lexically word-for-word, i.
There is, as yet, no general theory of translationn, no general semetics or general pleretics 1 from which to draw descriptive terms for the distinctive features of contextual meanings of grammatical or lexical items in particular languages.
He was unhesitatingly served with the type required.
For example, the English: Scots system is unidimensional, embodying only deixis — 3 degrees this time l, 2, 3. Finally, there are categories of combination, e. In other words we can attribute the relative untranslata- bility of the two O items to a purely formal linguistic feature — unusualness of collocation.
In particular, however, I should like to thank Dr M. Syl- lables sometimes coincide with feet.