پایان نامه با کلید واژگان Translation، tradition

d guided me all my way throughout the conduction of this research; without his knowledge and assistance this study would not have been successful.
I am also indebted to my dear reader, Dr. Abdullah Baradaran who patiently reviewed this study and made an invaluable contribution to its completion.
I would also like to acknowledge the support and assistance given me by all my graduate friends, for sharing the literature and helpful assistance.
Last, but not least I would like to express my deepest love and gratitude to my beloved family; for their understanding & endless love through the duration of my study and also for their support, tolerance, and enthusiasm throughout the conduction of this research.
Table of Contents
Epigraph II
Dedication III
Acknowledgments IV
Table of Contents V
List of Tables VIII
List of Graphs IX
Abstract X
CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 1
1.1. Introduction 2
1.2. Significance of the Study 7
1.3. Statement of the Problem 11
1.4. Research Questions 14
1.5. Definition of the Key Terms 15
1.6. Limitations and Delimitations 16
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 18
2.1. Introduction 19
2.2. Translation 21
2.3. Culture 25
2.4. Language and Culture 29
2.5. Translation and Culture 33
2.6. Translation Problems 36
2.6.1. Linguistics Differences 37
2.6.2. Social Differences 41
2.6.3. Cultural Differences 42
2.7. Presuppositions 47
2.7.1. Philosophical Presupposition 48
2.7.2. Semantic Presupposition 48
2.7.3. Pragmatic Presupposition 49
2.7.4. Cultural Presupposition 50
2.8. Cultural Presuppositions 50
2.9. Different Classifications of Cultural Presuppositions 52
2.9.1. Newmark’s Classification 53
2.9.2. Thriveni’s Classification 58
2.9.3. Pavlovic’s Classification 60
2.10. Translation Strategies 63
2.11. Translation Strategies for Cultural Presuppositions 66
2.11.1. House’s Strategies 67
2.11.2. Newmark’s Strategies 68
2.11.3. Baker’s Strategies 72
2.11.4. Hervey and Higgins’ Strategies 74
2.11.5. Aixela’s Strategies 77
2.11.6. Vinay and Darblenet’s Strategies 81
2.11.7. Wiersema’s Strategies 82
2.12. Concluding Points 83
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 84
3.1. Introduction 85
3.2. Corpus 86
3.3. Theoretical Framework 88
3.4. Design 97
3.5. Procedure 97
3.6. Data Collection 98
3.7. Data Analysis 98
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 100
4.1. Introduction 101
4.2. Description of the Data 101
4.2.1. Cultural Presuppositions 102
4.2.1.1. Ecology 102
4.2.1.2. Material Culture (Artifacts) 102
4.2.1.3. Social Culture 104
4.2.1.4. Organizations, Customs, Ideas 105
4.2.1.5. Gestures and Habits 107
4.2.2. Translation Strategies 108
4.2.2.1. Transference 108
4.2.2.2. Naturalization 109
4.2.2.3. Cultural Equivalent 110
4.2.2.4. Functional Equivalent 110
4.2.2.5. Descriptive Equivalent 111
4.2.2.6. Synonymy 112
4.2.2.7. Through-translation 113
4.2.2.8. Shifts or Transposition 114
4.2.2.9. Reduction and Expansion 115
4.2.2.10. Couplets, Triplets, and Quadruplets 116
4.2.2.11. Notes, Additions, and Glosses 117
4.3. Analysis of the Data 121
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 126
5.1. Introduction 127
5.2. Conclusion 128
5.3. Pedagogical Implications 130
5.4. Suggestions for Further Research 132
References 134
Appendixes 139
List of Tables
Table 1: Food 18
Table 2: Clothes 18
Table 3: Housing 18
Table 4: Transport 18
Table 5: Work 18
Table 6: Leisure 18
Table 7: Political and Administrative 18
Table 8: Religious 18
Table 9: Artistic 18
Table 10: Historical Terms 18
Table 11: Gestures and Habits 18
Table 12: Transference 18
Table 13: Naturalization 18
Table 14: Cultural Equivalent 18
Table 15: Functional Equivalent 18
Table 16: Descriptive Equivalent 18
Table 17: Synonymy 18
Table 18: Through-translation 18
Table 19: Shifts 18
Table 20: Reduction 18
Table 21: Couplets 18
Table 22: Triplets 18
Table 23: Additions 18
Table 24: Notes 18
Table 25: Overall frequencies of cultural presuppositions 18
Table 26: Overall frequencies of translation strategies 18
Table 27: All cultural presuppositions separately for each short story 18
Table 28: All cultural presuppositions and their translation strategies 18
List of Graphs
Graph 1: Percentages of Cultural Presuppositions 18
Graph 2: Percentages of Translation Strategies 18
Abstract
Translation as a way to transfer the meaning is a kind of activity that involves not only two languages, but also two cultures. Like any other field of study, translation deals with all the aspects of human life such as social, industrial, and cultural. In other words it is not enough for translators to have a good command of both the source and target languages; they have to be completely aware of both the source and target cultures. Each culture creates certain messages, connotations, and denotations. Therefore it is likely that many concepts occur in one language and culture but not in the other. In other words, one of the major problems facing translators is how to find equivalents for implicit ideas, opinions, and presuppositions, which have their bases in their underlying cultures. Facing with unshared elements of culture, namely cultural presuppositions, between the source and target language, translators have a variety of options to treat the cultural aspects of the ST and finding the most appropriate strategy to convey these aspects in the TT. The present study will focus on different translation strategies which the Persian translators of James Joyce’s “Dubliners” (2001) have applied to deal with translation problems rooted in cultural presuppositions. The process of classification of cultural presuppositions and the translation strategies for dealing with them is based on Newmark’s (1988) translation categorizations.
CHAPTER I
Background and Purpose
1.1 Introduction
Translating as an activity is almost as old as mankind, but the history of translation as a discipline dates back to no more than two decades ago (Schaffner & Kelly-Holms, 1995). In this short period of systematic investigation of this discipline, the nature of such studies has undergone a drastic change. Traditionally there has been a dividing line between the language and the extra linguistic reality. Although there have been different definitions of translation but most of them emphasized the linguistic aspects of the translation process. For instance, Catford’s (1974) definition of translation is as follows: “translation is the replacement of textual material in one language by equivalent textual material in another language.” (P.20). As it can be seen here what is significant is the equivalent textual material. Next, Newmark (1981) defines translation in this way: “Translation is a craft, consisting of two languages, in the attempt to replace a written message and/or statement in another language” (P.7).
Defining translation seems simple at first glance and there are many definitions of this kind. However, translation is not strictly limited to language, rather, language and culture are deeply intertwined and it is the translation which bridges the gap between different languages and hence, cultures. Here it is clear that these definitions by famous theoreticians exclude the factor of culture in translation. As Snell-Hornby (1988) claims, translation must be regarded something more than merely transcending the linguistic elements from one language to another. It has recently come to be understood as a cultural system and it was to be treated with delicate observing the cultural aspects. Gradually some theorists confirm this fact that translation is an activity which involves a kind of verbal, but never strictly verbal communication. Miremadi (1991), for instance, has stated: “it is a two-way process: from one culture to the others and form other cultures into one’s culture. In other words, there is a give and take process” (P.11). Toury (1978) also believes that “Translation is a kind of activity which inevitably involves at least two languages and two cultural traditions” (P.200). The reason for such a drastic change in the point of view toward the translation studies is that the contemporary approach sees language as the integral part of culture. Language is an expression of culture and individuality of its speakers; so cultural meanings are intricately woven into the texture of the language.
Newmark (1988) defines culture as: “the way of life and its manifestation that is peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its means of expression” (P.93). Culture is a complex collection of experiences which condition daily life; it includes history, social structure, religious, traditional customs and every day usage. Translating as an activity and translation as the result of this activity are inseparable from the concept of culture.
Regarding this definition, it is clear that there are many words and expressions that differ from one culture to another; for instance, way of living varies from one society to another according to the beliefs of the people, the situation in which they live, the technological advances, etc. So, every culture has its own characteristics. The people of a special society know the characteristics of their culture while the people of other communities are not able to understand it. Histories of different societies and cultures are characterized by events and processes that shape their cultural cognition. It is possible that different events and processes have similar effects on language use and it is also possible that similar

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید