Anemona Ptrulescu Equivalence and Non-equivalence

in Clinescus Enigma Otiliei

Anemona Ptrulescu

Equivalence and Non-equivalence

in Clinescus Enigma Otiliei

Editura SITECH Craiova, 2012

Corectura aparine autorului. 2012 Editura Sitech Craiova Toate drepturile asupra acestei ediii sunt rezervate editurii. Orice reprodu-cere integral sau parial, prin orice procedeu, a unor pagini din aceast lu-crare, efectuate fr autorizaia editorului este ilicit i constituie o contra-facere. Sunt acceptate reproduceri strict rezervate utilizrii sau citrii justifi-cate de interes tiinific, cu specificarea respectivei citri. 2012 Editura Sitech Craiova All rights reserved. This book is protected by copyright. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, including photocopying or utilised any information storage and retrieval system without written permision from the copyright owner. Editura SITECH din Craiova este acreditat de C.N.C.S.I.S. din cadrul Mi-nisterului Educaiei i Cercetrii pentru editare de carte tiinific. Editura SITECH Craiova, Romnia Aleea Teatrului, nr. 2, Bloc T1, parter Tel/fax: 0251/414003 E-mail: sitech@rdslink.ro

ISBN 978-606-11-2290-5

5

Contents

FOREWORD .................................................................... 7 Chapter I Equivalence defines translation ....................................... 10

1.1. Defining equivalence ............................................ 10 1.2. Several theories upon translation .......................... 15 1.3. The Critique of Equivalence ................................. 34 1.4. The importance of equivalence in translation ..... 37

Chapter II Non-equivalence in the Translation Field ...................... 40

2.1. Non-equivalence between source text and target text ..................................................................... 40 2.2 Available translation procedures ........................... 42

Chapter III The Challenging World of George Clinescus Translation Enigmatic Otilia ........................................... 54

3.1. TEXT CORPUS ................................................... 54 3.2. Text Analysis ........................................................ 63

Conclusions ................................................................... 131 Bibliography .................................................................. 133

7

The present volume addresses a readership interested in the field of literary translations. The main purpose of the book

is to develop basic notions concerning equivalence and non-

equivalence in translation, and then emphasize them in

practice. Accordingly, both equivalence and non-equivalence

are analyzed from the point of view of traditional and modern

theories elaborated within the field of translation theories.

Translation as a product has come to interest an ever-

increasing readership of non-native speakers of English who

need rapid access to information and who depend on the

professional work of translators. Thus I have tried to underline

in this book not only the importance of the theoretical concepts

but also to sustain them with clear examples provided by

George Clinescus challenging book.

The first part reveals the fact that a translation has to

stand in some kind of equivalence relation to the original,

which means that equivalence in translation is not an isolated

FOREWORD

8

quality; it is a functional concept that can be attributed to a

particular translational situation. It is worthwhile mentioning

that the contextualization of each and every meaning is of

outmost importance. It will help to disambiguate meanings, and

to be able to choose the context which the confusable words

and phrases match.

The second part comes to prove that equivalence always

implies the possibility of non-equivalence. The question of

whether particular words are untranslatable is often debated.

They are only words and these words are more or less hard to

translate depending on their nature and the translators skills.

Thus the translators should resort to various translation

procedures (shifts, borrowing, adaptation etc.) when

encountering such difficulties in translation. They will make

their final choices in terms of grammatical correctness, lexical

and semantic acceptability, text typology, style, register, as

well as in terms of translation equivalence and adequacy.

The third part comes to sustain all the theory presented

in the previous parts through practical application. It offers the

flavour of the book since all the conclusions about the topic

should be drawn from the analysis I have provided. When

translating, the translator encounters many traps and he should

know to overcome them. In discussing such traps which cover

9

many types of difficulties we have to consider both the extra

linguistic factors (authors intention, the place and the time

where ST was written, function of the ST/TT reader) and the

linguistic factors (subject matter, content, lexis, sentence

structure) all of them bearing stylistic implications.

A very important aspect when translating, interpreting

and analyzing a text, as well as in comparing it with the

original text is that the specific flavour of a text, the genius

of a language, the richness of a culture are ideologically

charged labels which finally leads to the conclusion of

untranslatibility. One of the most fundamental requirements

is the need of referring to each particular translation situation

as regards the use of connotations. So when translating the

translator has to enhance himself to a Sisyphean work, to go

through the painful process of creation in rendering a text from

one language to another.

Finally, the end-user will come to know if Moses had

horns or rays on his forehead.

10

Chapter I Equivalence defines translation

1.1. Defining equivalence

The notion of equivalence is undoubtedly one of the

most problematic and controversial areas in the field of

translation theory. The term has caused, and it seems quite

probable that it will continue to cause, heated debates within

the field of translation studies.

This term has been analyzed, evaluated and extensively

discussed from different points of view and has been

approached from many different perspectives. The first

discussions of the notion of equivalence in translation initiated

the further elaboration of the term by contemporary theorists.

The difficulty in defining equivalence seems to result in the

impossibility of having a universal approach to this notion.

Equivalence has been extensively used to define

translation, but few writers have been prepared to define

equivalence itself. Indeed, it is quite possible that the term in

11

question means all things to all theorists: since it is usually

taken to be the result of successful translating, its content as a

theoretical term is probably nothing more or less than the

theory according to which successful translating is defined.

Equivalence thus perhaps means whatever the ideal

translator should set out to achieve. Yet this is a mere

tautology: equivalence is supposed to define translation, but

translation would then appear to define equivalence.

Historical research is of little avail here. The brief

survey offered by Wilss (1982, 134-135) simply presents that

the English term "equivalence" entered translation studies from

mathematics, that it was originally associated with research

into machine translation, and that it has or should have a

properly technical sense. But Snell-Hornby has used comparative

historical analysis to argue against the possibility of any such

technical sense, claiming to have located some 58 different types

of equivalence referred to in German translation studies (1986,

15). Moreover, even if one could locate substantial common

factors underlying all these variants, there is surely no guarantee

that history or etymology alone will lead to the most fruitful

future definition. A slightly more creative approach is required. In

what follows, I want to suggest that equivalence-based definitions

of translation are fundamentally correct.

12

Despite all the problems with historical usages of the

term, despite recently fashionable attempts to ignore it

altogether, I believe that equivalence in its most unqualified

form definitionally ideal equivalence - does indeed define

translation. But to reach this conclusion, to discover what is

being said but not heard, it is necessary to discard several false

or inadequate notions of equivalence. We must disregard the

way structuralist linguistics once used the term to suggest a

symmetry of "equal values" between discrete systems; we must

turn to the economics of exchange in order to distinguish

equivalence from assumptions of natural use values or

functions; we must see how equivalence can actually operate

within a dynamic translational series based on the primacy of

exchange value; and finally, we must appreciate that equivalence

is not a predetermined relation that translators passively seek, but

instead it works as transitory fiction that translators produce in

order to have receivers somehow believe that translations have

not really been translated. In all, if equivalence is ideal to define

translation, we must take steps to redefine ideal equivalence. I

should stress that my subject in this chapter is neither more, nor

less than equivalence as an ideal.

The following are fairly representative equivalence-

based definitions of translation:

13

"Interlingual translation can be defined as the

replacement of elements of one language, the domain of

translation, by equivalent elements of another language, the

range [of translation]." (A. G. Oettinger 1960, 110).

"Translation may be defined as follows: the

replacement of textual material in one language (SL) by

equivalent material in another language (TL)." (Catford 1965,

20)

"Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor

language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language

message." (Nida and Taber 1969, 12); cf. Nida

195 "[Translation] leads from a source-language text to a

target-language text which is as close an equivalent as possible

and presupposes an understanding of the content and style of

the original." (Wilss 1982, 62)

Many further definitions could be added to this vein.

But the main variants in any further listing would tend to

concern more the nature of what is supposed to be equivalent

("elements", "textual material", "functions", "communicative

effect", etc.) than the nature of equivalence itself, which, within

this decidedly twentieth-century tradition, is simply assumed to

exist. It might of course be assumed that the term means

exactly what it says: a relation of equal values. But in all the

14

above definitions, the term "equivalent" is used to describe

only TTs, the products resulting from the translating process. It

is not used to describe the ST, the abstractly initial material, the

textual material as it arrives in the place of the translator. This

one-sided use implies an asymmetry that must be considered at

least odd if associated with a relationship of presumed equality.

The verbs employed or implied ("replace", "reproduce",

"lead to", etc.) not only refer to processes, but are decidedly

unidirectional in nature. Translating goes from ST to TT, and if

the process is reversed it is called "back-translation", as a kind

of underhand reversal of the correct way of the word. The

described processes are also peculiarly subjectless: it is obvious

that somebody or something must be doing the "replacing" or

"reproducing", but this person or thing appears to have no

expressed place in the translational process. Although there

must be at least some notion of location implied in terms like

"replacement" and "lead to", the subjectless nature of this place

suggests that no one particularly cares who or what is doing the

work.

Taking all of this together, we find that the term

equivalence is commonly associated with the final result of

translating as a one-way process occurring in an apparently

subjectless place. Equivalence is directional and subjectless. I

15

believe that these distinctive features are highly useful for the

definition of translation.

1.2. Several theories upon translation

The aim of this subchapter is to review the theory of

equivalence as interpreted by some of the most innovative

theorists in this fieldVinay and Darbelnet, Jakobson, Nida

and Taber, Catford, House and finally Baker. These theorists

have studied equivalence in relation to the translation process,

using different approaches, and have provided fruitful ideas for

further study on this topic. Their theories will be analyzed in

chronological order so that it will be easier to follow the

evolution of this concept. These theories can be substantially

divided into three main groups. The first group reunites those

translation scholars who are in favor of a linguistic approach to

translation and who seem to forget that translation in itself is

not merely a matter of linguistics. In fact, when a message is

transferred from the SL to TL, the translator is also dealing

with two different cultures at the same time. This particular

aspect seems to have been taken into consideration by the

second group of theorists who regard translation equivalence as

being essentially a transfer of the message from the SC to the

16

TC and a pragmatic/semantic or functionally oriented approach

to translation. Finally, there are other translation scholars who

seem to stand in the middle, such as Baker for instance, who

claims that equivalence is used 'for the sake of convenience

because most translators are used to it rather than because it

has any theoretical status' (quoted in Kenny, 1998:77).

1.2.1. Vinay and Darbelnet and their definition of

equivalence in translation

Vinay and Darbelnet view equivalence-oriented

translation as a procedure which 'replicates the same situation

as in the original, whilst using completely different wording'.

They also suggest that, if this procedure is applied during the

translation process, it can maintain the stylistic impact of the

SL text in the TL text. According to them, equivalence is

therefore the ideal method when the translator has to deal with

proverbs, idioms, clichs, nominal or adjectival phrases and the

onomatopoeia of animal sounds. With regard to equivalent

expressions between language pairs, Vinay and Darbelnet

claim that they are acceptable as long as they are listed in a

bilingual dictionary as 'full equivalents' (ibid.:255). However,

later they note that glossaries and collections of idiomatic

17

expressions 'can never be exhaustive' (ibid.256). They

conclude by saying that 'the need for creating equivalences

arises from the situation, and it is in the situation of the SL text

that translators have to look for a solution' (ibid. 255).

Indeed, they argue that even if the semantic equivalent

of an expression in the SL text is quoted in a dictionary or a

glossary, it is not enough, and it does not guarantee a

successful translation. They provide a number of examples to

prove their theory, and the following expression appears in

their list: Take one is a fixed expression which would have as

an equivalent French translation Prenez-en un. However, if the

expression appeared as a notice next to a basket of free samples

in a large store, the translator would have to look for an

equivalent term in a similar situation and use the expression

chantillon gratuity.(ibid.256)

1.2.2. Jakobson and the concept of equivalence in

difference

Roman Jakobson's study of equivalence gave new

impetus to the theoretical analysis of translation since he

introduced the notion of 'equivalence in difference'. On the

basis of his semiotic approach to language and his aphorism

18

'there is no signatum without signum' (1959:232), he suggests

three kinds of translation:

Intralingual (within one language, i.e. rewording or

paraphrase)

Interlingual (between two languages)

Intersemiotic (between sign systems)

Jakobson claims that, in the case of interlingual

translation, the translator makes use of synonyms in order to

get the ST message across. This means that in interlingual

translations there is no full equivalence between code units.

According to his theory, 'translation involves two equivalent

messages in two different codes' (ibid.233). Jakobson goes on

to say that from a grammatical point of view languages may

differ from one another to a greater or lesser extent, but this

does not mean that a translation cannot be possible, in other

words, that the translator may face the problem of not finding a

translation equivalent.

He acknowledges that 'whenever there is deficiency,

terminology may be qualified and amplified by loanwords or

loan-translations, neologisms or semantic shifts, and finally, by

circumlocutions' (ibid.234). Jakobson provides a number of

examples by comparing English and Russian language

structures and explains that in such cases where there is no a

19

literal equivalent for a particular ST word or sentence, then it is

up to the translator to choose the most suitable way to render it

in the TT.

There seems to be some similarity between Vinay and

Darbelnet's theory of translation procedures and Jakobson's

theory of translation. Both theories stress the fact that,

whenever a linguistic approach is no longer suitable to carry

out a translation, the translator can rely on other procedures

such as loan-translations, neologisms and the like. Both

theories recognize the limitations of a linguistic theory and

argue that a translation can never be impossible since there are

several methods that the translator can choose. The role of the

translator as the person who decides how to carry out the

translation is emphasized in both theories. Vinay and Darbelnet

as well as Jakobson conceive the translation task as something

which can always be carried out from one language to another,

regardless of the cultural or grammatical differences between

ST and TT. It can be concluded that Jakobson's theory is

essentially based on his semiotic approach to translation

according to which the translator has to recode the ST message

first and then s/he has to transmit it into an equivalent message

for the TC.

20

1.2.3. Nida and Taber: Formal correspondence and

dynamic equivalence

Nida argued that there are two different types of

equivalence, namely formal equivalencewhich in the second

edition by Nida and Taber (1982) is referred to as formal

correspondenceand dynamic equivalence.

Formal correspondence 'focuses attention on the

message itself, in both form and content', unlike dynamic

equivalence which is based upon 'the principle of equivalent

effect' (1964:159). In the second edition (1982) of their work,

the two theorists provide a more detailed explanation of each

type of equivalence. Formal correspondence consists of a TL

item which represents the closest equivalent of a SL word or

phrase. Nida and Taber make it clear that there are not always

formal equivalents between language pairs. They therefore

suggest that these formal equivalents should be used wherever

possible if the translation aims at achieving formal rather than

dynamic equivalence. The use of formal equivalents might at

times have serious implications in the TT since the translation

will not be easily understood by the target audience (Fawcett,

1997).

Nida and Taber themselves assert that 'Typically, formal

21

correspondence distorts the grammatical and stylistic patterns

of the receptor language, and hence distorts the message, so as

to cause the receptor to misunderstand or to labor unduly hard'

(ibid.201). Dynamic equivalence is defined as a translation

principle according to which a translator seeks to translate the

meaning of the original in such a way that the TL wording will

trigger the same impact on the TC audience as the original

wording did upon the ST audience. They argue that

'Frequently, the form of the original text is changed; but as

long as the change follows the rules of back transformation in

the source language, of contextual consistency in the transfer,

and of transformation in the receptor language, the message is

preserved and the translation is faithful' (Nida and Taber,

1982:200). One can easily see that Nida is in favor of the

application of dynamic equivalence, as a more effective

translation procedure. This is perfectly understandable if we

take into account the context of the situation in which Nida was

dealing with the translation phenomenon, that is to say, his

translation of the Bible. Thus, the product of the translation

process, that is the text in the TL, must have the same impact

on the different readers it was addressing. Only in Nida and

Taber's edition it is clearly stated that 'dynamic equivalence in

translation is far more than mere correct communication of

22

information' (ibid:25). Despite using a linguistic approach to

translation, Nida is much more interested in the message of the

text or, in other words, in its semantic quality. He therefore

strives to make sure that this message remains clear in the

target text.

1.2.4. Catford and the introduction of translation shifts

Catford's approach to translation equivalence clearly

differs from that adopted by Nida since Catford had a

preference for a more linguistic-based approach to translation

and this approach is based on the linguistic work of Firth and

Halliday. His main contribution in the field of translation

theory is the introduction of the concepts of types and shifts of

translation. Catford proposed very broad types of translation in

terms of three criteria:

1. The extent of translation (full translation vs. partial

translation);

2. The grammatical rank at which the translation

equivalence is established (rank-bound translation vs.

unbounded translation)

3. The levels of language involved in translation (total

translation vs. restricted translation).

23

We will refer only to the second type of translation,

since this is the one that concerns the concept of equivalence,

and we will then move on to analyze the notion of translation

shifts, as elaborated by Catford, which are based on the distinction

between formal correspondence and textual equivalence. In

rank-bound translation an equivalent is sought in the TL for

each word, or for each morpheme encountered in the ST. In

unbounded translation equivalences are not tied to a particular

rank, and we may additionally find equivalences at sentence,

clause and other levels. Catford finds five of these ranks or

levels in both English and French.

Thus, a formal correspondence could be said to exist

between English and French if relations between ranks have

approximately the same configuration in both languages, as

Catford claims. One of the problems with formal

correspondence is that, despite being a useful tool to employ in

comparative linguistics, it seems that it is not really relevant in

terms of assessing translation equivalence between ST and TT.

For this reason we now turn to Catford's other dimension of

correspondence, namely textual equivalence which occurs

when any TL text or portion of text is 'observed on a particular

occasion ... to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of

text' (ibid.:27). He implements this by a process of

24

commutation, whereby 'a competent bilingual informant or

translator' is consulted on the translation of various sentences

whose ST items are changed in order to observe 'what changes

if any occur in the TL text as a consequence' (ibid.:28). As far

as translation shifts are concerned, Catford defines them as

'departures from formal correspondence in the process of

going from the SL to the TL' (ibid.73). Catford argues that there

are two main types of translation shifts, namely level shifts,

where the SL item at one linguistic level (e.g. grammar) has a

TL equivalent at a different level (e.g. lexis), and category

shifts which are divided into four types:

1. Structure-shifts, which involve a grammatical change

between the structure of the ST and that of the TT;

2. Class-shifts, when a SL item is translated with a TL

item which belongs to a different grammatical class, i.e.

a verb may be translated by a noun;

3. Unit-shifts, which involve changes in rank;

4. Intra-system shifts, which occur when 'SL and TL

possess systems which approximately correspond

formally as to their constitution, but when translation

involves selection of a non-corresponding term in the

TL system' (ibid.80). For instance, when the SL

singular becomes a TL plural.

25

1.2.5. House and the elaboration of overt and covert

translation

House (1977) is in favor of semantic and pragmatic

equivalence and argues that ST and TT should match each

other in function. House suggests that it is possible to

characterize the function of a text by determining the

situational dimensions of the ST. In fact, according to her

theory, every text in itself is placed within a particular situation

which has to be correctly identified and taken into account by

the translator. After the ST analysis, House is in a position to

evaluate a translation; if the ST and the TT differ substantially

on situational features, then they are not functionally

equivalent, and the translation is not of a high quality. In fact,

she acknowledges that 'a translation text should not only match

its source text in function, but employ equivalent situational-

dimensional means to achieve that function' (ibid.:49). Central

to House's discussion is the concept of overt and covert

translations. In an overt translation the TT audience is not

directly addressed and there is therefore no need at all to

attempt to recreate a 'second original' since an overt translation

'must overtly be a translation' (ibid.:189). By covert

translation, on the other hand, it is meant the production of a

26

text which is functionally equivalent to the ST. House also

argues that in this type of translation the ST 'is not specifically

addressed to a TC audience' (ibid.:194). House (ibid.203) sets

out the types of ST that would probably yield translations of

the two categories. An academic article, for instance, is

unlikely to exhibit any features specific to the SC; the article

has the same argumentative or expository force that it would if

it had originated in the TL, and the fact that it is a translation at

all need not be made known to the readers. A political speech

in the SC, on the other hand, is addressed to a particular

cultural or national group which the speaker sets out to move to

action or otherwise influence, whereas the TT merely informs

outsiders what the speaker is saying to his or her constituency.

It is clear that in this latter case, which is an instance of overt

translation, functional equivalence cannot be maintained, and it

is therefore intended that the ST and the TT function

differently.

House's theory of equivalence in translation seems to be

much more flexible than Catford's. In fact, she gives authentic

examples, uses complete texts and, more importantly, she

relates linguistic features to the context of both source and

target text.

27

1.2.6. Baker's approach to translation equivalence

New adjectives have been assigned to the notion of

equivalence (grammatical, textual, pragmatic equivalence, and

several others) and made their appearance in the plethora of

recent works in this field.

An extremely interesting discussion of the notion of

equivalence can be found in Baker (1992) who seems to offer a

more detailed list of conditions upon which the concept of

equivalence can be defined. She explores the notion of

equivalence at different levels, in relation to the translation

process, including all different aspects of translation and hence

putting together the linguistic and the communicative

approach.

She distinguishes between:

Equivalence that can appear at word level and above

word level, when translating from one language into

another. Baker acknowledges that, in a bottom-up

approach to translation, equivalence at word level is the

first element to be taken into consideration by the

translator. In fact, when the translator starts analyzing

the ST s/he looks at the words as single units in order to

find a direct 'equivalent' term in the TL. Baker gives a

28

definition of the term word since it should be

remembered that a single word can sometimes be

assigned different meanings in different languages and

might be regarded as being a more complex unit or

morpheme. This means that the translator should pay

attention to a number of factors when considering a

single word, such as number, gender and tense (ibid.11-

12).

Grammatical equivalence, when referring to the

diversity of grammatical categories across languages.

She notes that grammatical rules may vary across

languages and this may pose some problems in terms of

finding a direct correspondence in the TL. In fact, she

claims that different grammatical structures in the SL

and TL may cause remarkable changes in the way the

information or message is carried across. These changes

may induce the translator either to add or to omit

information in the TT because of the lack of particular

grammatical devices in the TL itself. Amongst these

grammatical devices which might cause problems in

translation Baker focuses on number, tense and aspects,

voice, person and gender.

Textual equivalence, when referring to the equivalence

29

between a SL text and a TL text in terms of information

and cohesion. Texture is a very important feature in

translation since it provides useful guidelines for the

comprehension and analysis of the ST which can help

the translator in his or her attempt to produce a cohesive

and coherent text for the TC audience in a specific

context. It is up to the translator to decide whether or

not to maintain the cohesive ties as well as the

coherence of the SL text. His or her decision will be

guided by three main factors, that is, the target

audience, the purpose of the translation and the text

type.

Pragmatic equivalence, when referring to implicatures

and strategies of avoidance during the translation

process. Implicature is not about what is explicitly said

but what is implied. Therefore, the translator needs to

work out implied meanings in translation in order to get

the ST message across.

The role of the translator is to recreate the author's

intention in another culture in such a way that enables the TC

reader to understand it clearly.

30

1.2.7. Another equivalence typology

As we can observe in the theoretical considerations

presented above that there are several kinds of equivalence,

however, with different implications and effects. While many

different authors use different terms regarding the problem of

equivalence, I would better choose to use the terms cultural,

conceptual and structural equivalence. It should be noted that

these concepts should be viewed independently of one another

as, for example, you can have structural equivalence without

having conceptual equivalence and vice-versa.

Cultural Equivalence

The most fundamental problem in developing

instruments for cross-cultural research or foreign language

instruments is that the translator needs not only to translate

language but culture as well. The most common difficulty in

translation occurs when the target language lacks a certain

word or concept which we generally take for granted in

Western culture, but which does not exist or is viewed

differently in other cultures.

Examples of this are our concept of time, names of

colors, seasons, not to mention concepts associated with

Western standards, values, and morals. In some cases a word in

31

English may have a highly compressed meaning which in

translation may require several sentences or even paragraphs to

express. This is almost always the case when translating into

Spanish and more often than not into almost any other

language. In other cases there may be no alternative but to

eliminate items because a counterpart does not exist or would

be of too uncertain equivalence in another culture.

Conceptual Equivalence

Conceptual equivalence refers to the absence of

differences in meaning and content between two versions of an

instrument. A problem common in the translation process is

that of frequency of usage of a certain word. Often, although a

word may be an adequate literal translation, the words will not

have meaning equivalence for survey purposes if there is a

discrepancy in the frequency of usage of a word in two

cultures. Still, the most serious problem in this regard is that of

connotation and secondary meanings.

Words are focal points of complex networks of

meaning and receive shades of significance from varied and

unexpected sources. Another problem is that of non-

equivalence of terms. There are times when it may be

impossible to find a term that is the exact equivalent in another

language. Yet another problem occurs when the target

32

language has several synonyms and definitions for a single

word. Which should be used? It is in relation to these two

problems that the translator becomes extremely important. A

frequently attempted solution to this problem is the use of

several words in the target language to try to convey an idea or

concept expressed by one word in the source language.

(Example: ice cream = helado / nieve; cake = pastel / torta /

queque / biscocho). Both the researcher and the translator need

to have considerable knowledge of the target culture and

language in order to gain cultural and conceptual equivalence.

Questionnaires that attempt to preserve the exact form

of questions in the original language, especially pre-coded

ones, can lead to major errors. Although it might seem that one

should avoid the use of idiomatic language in constructing

instruments, failing to do so can have the effect of producing a

highly stilted form of discourse that may be unsuitable for the

population surveyed. Additionally, more and more of the

literature and current research indicate that this may be the best

approach.

This approach essentially attempts to gain conceptual

equivalence with regard to the information the researcher wants

to elicit, instead of with the form of the question used to elicit

this information. Put another way," instruments should offer

33

psychological equivalence to respondents and not apparent

objective equivalence to the investigator. To pose the same

form of question to two people who are different may require

posing that question in two different forms." (Robinson,

1984:163).

Structural Equivalence

Structural equivalence refers to equivalence in syntax,

spelling, and punctuation. In this regard equivalence problems

arise from the fact that languages differ widely in their

grammars and syntax's and these in turn affect meaning in

translation. Perhaps the most common grammatical problem in

translation is achieving equivalence between verb forms. This

becomes more problematic in longer passages than in shorter

ones. There are techniques for making an instrument more

"translatable" from a structural perspective, however. One can

predict the translatability of an instrument to a certain degree.

Some content areas produce fewer difficulties than others, just

as some languages are easier to be translated than others. In

developing an instrument one will want to know the upper

level of difficulty of the original English that can be expected

to translate well.

Furthermore, one can produce an easily translatable

version of an instrument by: 1)using simple sentences; 2)

34

repetition of nouns rather than pronouns; 3) avoiding metaphor

and colloquialisms; 4) avoiding English passive tense; 5)

avoiding hypothetical phrasings or subjunctive mood; 6)

adding context to ideas and redundancy to sentences; 7)

avoiding too much detail.

1.3. The Critique of Equivalence

Catford was one of the authors very much criticized for

his linguistic theory of translation. One of the most scathing

criticisms came from Snell-Hornby (1988), who argued that

Catford's definition of textual equivalence is 'circular', his

theory's reliance on bilingual informants 'hopelessly inadequate',

and his example sentences 'isolated and even absurdly

simplistic' (ibid.:19-20).

She considers the concept of equivalence in translation

as being an illusion. She asserts that the translation process

cannot simply be reduced to a linguistic exercise, as claimed by

Catford for instance, since there are also other factors, such as

textual, cultural and situational aspects, which should be taken

into consideration when translating. In other words, she does

not believe that linguistics is the only discipline which enables

people to carry out a translation, since translating involves

35

different cultures and different situations at the same time and

they do not always match from one language to another.

Mary Snell-Hornbys integrated approach of 1988

sought to bring together and systematize the work that had

been done to that date. One of the most remarkable aspects of

this integrative exercise was the list of effectively excluded

approaches. Snell-Hornbys peremptory style dismissed two

thousand years of translation theory as an inconclusive heated

discussion opposing word to sense. Not surprisingly, she also

forcefully discarded equivalence as being unsuitable as a basic

concept in translation theory None of the excluded

approaches, said Snell-Hornby, have provided any substantial

help in furthering translation studies The interesting thing

about these exclusions is that, unlike Toury or Vermeer, Snell-

Hornby tried to indicate precisely where the equivalence

paradigm had gone wrong. This is where translation studies

could have become truly upsetting.

Some of the things Snell-Hornby says about

equivalence are perceptive and stimulating. For example, she

finds that in the course of the 1970s the English term

equivalence became increasingly approximate and vague to

the point of complete insignificance, and its German

counterpart was increasingly static and one-dimensional.

36

This difference curiously maps onto the strategies of Toury and

Vermeer as outlined above, suggesting that there was in fact no

radical rupture between those who talked about equivalence

and those who preferred not to (Toury accepted the English-

language trend; Vermeer fell in with the German-language

usage of the term). Summing up a very meandering argument,

Snell-Hornby concludes that the term equivalence, apart from

being imprecise and ill-defined (even after a heated debate of

over twenty years) presents an illusion of symmetry between

languages which hardly exists beyond the level of vague

approximations and which distorts the basic problems of

translation. Some kind of equivalence could be integrated into

its appropriate corner (technical terminology), but the

equivalence paradigm should otherwise get out of the way.

Snell-Hornby did not care that notions of equivalence

had been strategically useful against theories of

untranslatability, nor that they had effectively achieved a

degree of institutional legitimation for translation studies. Hers

was a different historical moment, with different strategies and

goals. But even given the new context, at least one sleight of

hand should be pointed out. If the term equivalence were

really so polysemous - Snell-Hornby elsewhere claims to have

located fifty-eight different types in German uses of the term

37

(1986: 15) The term apparently means nothing except this

illusion. And yet none of the numerous linguists ever

presupposed any symmetry between languages. Since Snell-

Hornby gives no citation supporting her reduction of the term,

this description of equivalence looks like hers. Of little import

whether the idealized symmetry between languages belonged

more to the word/sense debate, Snell-Hornby strangely thinks

the notion of equivalence had been born to overcome. Indeed,

had she looked a little further, Snell-Hornby might have found

that concepts like Nidas dynamic equivalence presuppose

substantial linguistic asymmetry.

Snell-Hornbys Integrated Approach has indeed had

influence, and may yet find more. It was the right title at the

right time, lying in wait for the massive growth of translator-

training institutions that took off at the end of the decade.

1.4. The importance of equivalence in translation

Although the 1980s critiques of equivalence opened up

new possibilities of interpreting equivalence, they mostly failed

to understand the logic of the previous paradigm. Little attempt

was made to objectify the subjective importance of equivalence

38

as a concept. It is one thing to argue that substantial

equivalence is an illusion, but quite another to understand why

anyone should be prepared to believe in it.

A translation has to stand in some kind of equivalence

relation to the original, which means that equivalence in

translation is not an isolated quality, it is a functional concept

that can be attributed to a particular translational situation.

Equivalence is crucial to translation because it is the unique

intertextual relation that only translations, among all

conceivable text types, are expected to show.

The minority return to equivalence discovers a problem

that the previous usages of the term had played down. It could

even be drawing out the critical potential of something like

Tourys initial acceptance of equivalence. Rather than force

any translator to become an equivalence-seeker, or assume

any rational recovery of original meaning, the above writers

emphasize that the translator is an equivalence producer, a

professional communicator working for people who pay to

believe that, on whatever level is pertinent, B is equivalent to

A. In so doing, the recent references to equivalence are

objectifying the subjective, recognizing but not necessarily

condoning a socially operative belief that enables translations-

and translators to work.

39

The linguistics-derived concept of equivalence was an

expression of what translation ideally represented for certain

people, notably translators organizations in search of higher

social status, readers in search of translated information,

European politicians in search of reliable transcultural

communication,

and academics in search of authoritative science.

It expressed certain ideals of translation as a contemporary

social practice. Theories that now project little substantial

equivalence - whether or not they use the term - should

nevertheless be able to recognize and objectify the subjective

interests that make translation work as a social practice.

Translation studies cannot just put texts under linguistic

microscopes. It must also objectify the beliefs - the current but

uncritical term is norms - that condition the way translations

are received and thus the way translators tend to work. Such

subjective beliefs obviously include the illusions that remain

operative on the level of theory.

40

Chapter II Non-equivalence in the

Translation Field

2.1. Non-equivalence between source text and target text

Equivalence no matter what definition it figured in

during the bad old days, always implied the possibility of non-

equivalence, of non-translation of a text that was in some way

not fully translational.

A translators choice is much more difficult to make

with the non-equivalence situations when the translator cannot

find a direct equivalent in the target language (TL) for a certain

word in the source-language (SL).

The types and the degrees of translation difficulties are

as various as the type of non-equivalence and their study is as

interesting as useful for translators. There must be added the

fact it is almost impossible to establish absolute criteria of

studying the different types of non-equivalence. The translator

has to use strategies which differ from one situation to another,

and which may be more or less complex and difficult to

41

explain. It is the type of non-equivalence, on the one hand, and

the context as well as translation goal, on the other hand, that

determine the translators choice of the type of strategy (Baker

1992: 24). The question of whether particular words are

untranslatable is often debated, with lists of "untranslatable"

words being produced from time to time. These lists often

include words such as saudade, a Portuguese word (also used

in Spanish) as an example of an "untranslatable". It translates

quite neatly however as "sorrowful longing", but has some

nuances that are hard to include in a translation; for instance, it

is a positive-valued concept, a subtlety which is not clear in

this basic translation.

Some words are hard to translate only if one wishes to

stick to the same grammatical category. Journalists are

naturally enthusiastic when linguists document obscure words

with local flavour, and are wont to declare them

"untranslatable", but in reality these incredibly culture-laden

terms are the easiest of all to translate, even more so than

universal concepts such as "mother". This is because it is

standard practice to translate these words by the same word in

the other language, borrowing it for the first time if necessary.

For example, an English version of a menu in a French

restaurant would rarely translate pt de foie gras as "fat liver

42

paste", although this is a good description. Instead, the

accepted translation is simply pt de foie gras, or, at most,

foie gras pt. The more obscure and specific to a culture the

term is, the simpler it is to translate.

Contrary to popular belief, words are not either

translatable or untranslatable. They are only words, and these

words are more or less hard to translate depending on their

nature and the translator's skills. Quite often, a text or utterance

that is considered to be "untranslatable" is actually a lacuna, or

lexical gap, that is to say that there is no one-to-one

equivalence between the word, expression or turn of phrase in

the source language and another word, expression or turn of

phrase in the target language. A translator, however, can resort

to a number of translation procedures to compensate.

2.2 Available translation procedures

2.2.1. TL longer structures rendered into a SL word

One of the most frequent cases is that of a word

(usually a noun) rendered by a longer syntagm. e.g. That most

popular with Locksleys wellwishers was that he had backed

out[...] ( Henry James, The Landscape Painter).

43

In this example the underlined word is translated by cea

mai rspndit opinie printre cei care erau de partea lui

Locksley era c acesta renunase[...] because the TL lacks an

equivalent in most of the contexts.

The noun sweetness in the syntagm detracted for him

from its sweetness is translated by gustul dulce al succsesului

also because the TL does not have an equivalent for such a

context: Attached , however, to the second pronouncement was

a condition that detracted, for Beale Farange from its

sweetness-an order that he should refund to his late wife the

twenty-six hundred pounds put down by her , some three years

before , in the interest of the childs maintenance[...] Cu

toate acestea, la a doua pronunare a fost adugat o clauz

care diminua pentru Beale Farange gustul dulce al succesului

o hotrre conform creia trebuia s restituie fostei sale soii

cele dou mii ase sute de lire sterline, bani pein pltii de ea,

cu vreo trei ani n urm, pentru ntreinerea copilului (H.

James, What Maisie Knew). Non-equivalence also includes the

situations in which more words are rendered by only one word.

For example the collocation a wilderness of heath is translated

by the noun pustietate in the following example: e.g. They

clung to the purple moors behind and around their dwelling- to

the hollow vale into which the pebbly bridle-path leading from

44

their gate descended, and which wound between fern-banks

first, and then amongst a few of the wildest little pasture-fields

that ever bordered a wilderness of heath [...]Erau foarte legate de mlatinile roiatice care le nconjurau casa- de valea

adnc n care cobora poteca acoperit cu prundi care

pornea de la poarta lor i care erpuia mai nti printre tufele

de ferig apoi printre cele mai slbatice puni care au

mrginit vreodat pustietatea[...] ( Ch. Bronte, Jane Eyre )

2.2.2. Shifts or transpositions

Such shifts or transpositions are frequent translation

procedures which involve changes in grammar from the SL to

the TL. For example the verbal adjective is most frequent

rendered into Romanian by a whole clause, usually an

attributive one.

e.g. There was a reviving pleasure in this

intercourse, of a kind now tasted by me for the first time[...]

In acest fel de prietenie, gseam o plcere care m nsufleea i pe care o simeam pentru prima dat... (Ch Bronte, Jane

Eyre). In the published version, it was translated by o mare

bucurie pe care o gustam ntia oar, which could be

considered a semantic loss.

45

But the differences in the grammatical structures of the

SL and TL may often bring about some changes in the

information content of the message. Two of the most frequent

and obvious changes are those which may take the form of

adding to the TT information which is not expressed in the ST,

or those which may be in the form of omitting from the TT

information specified in the ST.

Here are some of the most frequent syntactic structures

in the SL and in the TL, in our case English and Romanian:

SL noun

TL noun+adj. (breeze aerul rcoros)

TL noun+det.+adj. (extravagance-

cheltuielile mele extravagante )

SL adj.+ adj.

TL adv.+adj. ([a charm both] potent and

permanent- pururea irezistibil )

SL

noun+v+noun

TL v+adv. (thought fitted thought- gndeam

la fel )

TL v(a avea)+det.+noun (opinion met

opinion-aveam aceleai preri)

Even if languages may possess the same concepts, they

lack in some cases a perfect parallelism in the grammatical

structure. This shortcoming has to be solved by the translator

46

who will provide an apparently transformed version which in

fact ensures the clarity of the TT. Thus such a sequence like

noun+prepositional+group may be rendered through very

simple word combinations, or even much more complicated

structures such as the last example in the following table:

SL

noun+prep.+noun

TL v+DO clause ([possessed certain]

claims to distinction pretindeau c

se deosebesc prin ceva

TL noun+adj. (the blackness of the

clouds norii ntuneci; effect of

quiteness efect linititor)

TL noun+prep.+noun+prep.+noun

[remote] spot of peace loc ndeprtat

dintr-o oaz de linite

Since both the TL and the SL have their own

peculiarities, the translator should also consider those situations

where words relevant in one language may be absolutely

irrelevant in the other one. This is the case with She seemed to

find a wall to hit Prea c se lovete de un zid, where the

verb to find is irrelevant.

The subtle choices in point of relevance may differ

signficantly from one translator to another, which would affect

the quality and accuracy of the translation.

47

Another case of non-equivalence is that of using the

plural for SL singular. Thus the nouns in wave and rock and

cloud are marked for the plural in the TL in order to preserve

the stylistic effect of the original: Never before have I seen

such a pretty little coast-never before have I been so taken with

wave and rock and cloud Niciodat n-am mai vzut un loc

att de frumos pe rm- niciodat n-am fost att de fascinat de

valuri, de stnci i de nori. ( H. James, The Landscape Painter )

The coordinating conjunction and in the ST is replaced

by the preposition de in the TT in order to give the TT sentence

the rhythm and musicality of the ST one.

Thus, the literary translator has to overcome the

restrictions imposed by certain features of the SL structures

and has to make the TT sound natural.

One point that has to be kept in mind is that the content

of a message in the SL cannot always be matched by an

expression with exactly the same content in the TL , and what

must be expressed is a problem as difficult as that of how it can

be expressed. Following SL norms may involve minimal

change in the overall meaning. On the other hand, deviations

from typical TL patterns may result in a translation which will

sound foreign.

To conclude, it is obvious that the literary translator has

48

to be competent in handling the ST pattern in order to correctly

render the message into the TL and to produce a TT which will

read naturally and smoothly.

2.2.3. Adaptation

An adaptation, also known as a free translation, is a

translation procedure whereby the translator replaces a social,

or cultural reality in the source text with a corresponding

reality in the target text; this new reality would be more usual

to the audience of the target text.

For example, in the Belgian comic book The

Adventures of Tintin, Tintin's trusty canine Milou, is translated

as Snowy, in English and Bobby in Dutch; likewise the

detectives Dupond and Dupont become Thomson and

Thompson in English, Jansen and Janssen in Dutch, Schultze

and Schulze in German, Hernndez and Fernndez in Spanish,

the Spanish examples not being quite so faithful translations

since the pronunciation of the two names is different, and not

just the spelling.

Adaptation is often used when translating poetry, works

of theatre and advertising.

49

2.2.4. Borrowing

Borrowing is a translation procedure whereby the

translator uses a word or expression from the source text in the

target text. Borrowings are normally printed in italics if they

are not considered to have been naturalized in the target

languages.

2.2.5. Calque

Calque is a translation procedure whereby a translator

translates an expression (or, occasionally, a word) literally into

the target language, translating the elements of the expression

word for word.

2.2.6. Compensation

Compensation is a translation procedure whereby the

translator solves the problem of aspects of the source text that

cannot take the same form in the target language by replacing

these aspects with other elements or forms in the source text.

For example, many languages have two forms of the second

person pronoun an informal form and a formal form (the

50

French tu and vous, the Spanish t and Usted, the German du

and Sie, to name but three), while most modern-day dialects of

English no longer recognize the T-V distinction, and have

retained the you form only. Hence, to translate a text from one

of these languages into English, the translator may have to

compensate by using a first name or nickname, or by using

syntactic phrasing that are viewed as informal in English (I'm,

you're, gonna, dontcha, etc.)

2.2.7. Paraphrase

Paraphrase, sometimes called periphrasis, is a

translation procedure whereby the translator replaces a word in

the source text by a group of words or an expression in the

target texts. An extreme example of paraphrase can be found in

the BBC reports of June 22, 2004 of the identification of the

'most untranslatable' word. The word chosen is Ilunga, a word

supposedly from a language in the Democratic Republic of the

Congo. The BBC article states that "Ilunga means 'a person

who is ready to forgive any abuse for the first time, to tolerate

it a second time, but never a third time'." Here, the report

proves that this word is not in fact untranslatable, as it provides

an English translation by way of the periphrasis.

51

2.2.8. Translator's note

A translator's note is a note (usually a footnote or an

endnote) added by the translator to the target text to provide

additional information pertaining to the limits of the

translation, the cultural background or any other explanations.

Some translations allow or demand such notes. Despite this,

resorting to notes is normally seen as a failure by many

translation professionals.

2.2.9 Culture specific elements

The translator is a mediator between intercultural

situations of communication. This is based on his personal

perception of the cultural equation and on cultural competence.

The translator has to detect the personal elements in the text of

the culture concerned. Each cultural element is not simply seen

in respect of the language culture1 ( LC1) but viewed as being

the ground of a potential difference, distinction, because the

cultural features are central in the translation theory and

practice. The translator explores the LC2 in order to find the so-

called equivalent to a certain word in the LC1. He may be faced

with three unsatisfactory options:

52

- to keep the LC1 references but to produce a virtually

incomprehensible LC2 text;

- to find equivalent LC2 references, but to miss the

reference to a certain thing;

- to insert a simple passive reference to a certain thing,

which would entail missing the overall coherence of the

image.

Translators of literary texts often complain about the

lack of expressiveness, purity of LC2, and consider that the

genius of the original has to be maintained at any cost even at

the cost of the non-comprehension of the LC2 reader.

As Leon Levitchi pointed out when dealing with such

elements the translator can either preserve them as such or

provide them with an approximate equivalent in the TL. For

example the noun phrase an English Blue Book designates a

reality specific to the British culture, i.e. a British

parliamentary or other publication bound in a blue cover

(Webster 1996: 162 ); that is why it was given in translations a

word-for-word rendering and it was not replaced by a target

culture specific term which might be considered a possible

equivalent.

In translating the English corn fields a translator should

pay attention to the so-called false friends or deceptive

53

cognates because the term corn can be translated as grau,

grane, cereale in British English, as porumb in American

English or ovaz in Scottish or Irish.

In Romanian, the appelative neica is a variant of nene,

having the same meaning, that of termen de respect cu care se

adreseaz cineva unui brbat sau unui frate mai mare. Being a

culture specific element it could not be rendered into TL by a

similar word. And the examples could go on.

All these examples point out the importance of the

cross-cultural knowledge for the translator as a mediator

between cultures. His attention must be drawn to the LC1

specific elements of the text as his reading is always situated at

the level of difference. He will pay special attention to

certain elements which take on a particular importance when

considering the text from the LC2 perspective.

Consequently, the translators competence is measured

by his ability to analyse, compare and convert two cultural

systems.

54

Chapter III The Challenging World of George

Clinescus Translation Enigmatic Otilia

3.1. TEXT CORPUS

Text 1

Judecata era de o nedreptate scandaloas i se vedea c

nu vine dect din rutate. Pascalopol ncerc s mblnzeasc

situaia.

- Cucoan Aglae, azi eti ru dispus. Domnioara Otilia

cnt minunat, e o artist.

Aurica ls capul n jos, strngndu-i buzele ntre dini.

- Aa eti dumneata, galant, mai arunc Aglae o

neptur. Mai bine mi-ai spune ce s fac cu Titi c sunt foarte

suprat. L-a lsat corigent iar... l persecut fiindc el e timid,

nu e ndrzne ca alii... a fost i bolnav. Poate cunoti pe

cineva, s pun o vorb bun la toamn.

- Punem, punem, cum s nu se oferi Pascalopol,

55

ntotdeauna ndatoritor dar eu zic c pn atuncea s-l

prepare cineva, ca s fim mai siguri.

Felix edea pe o banc n apropierea chiocului, n btaia

luminii nehotrndu-se s plece ct vreme Otilia se afla prin

preajm. Deodat auzi glasul fr densitate al Aurichii, voit

persuasiv.

- Putem s rugm pe domnul Felix, mam, cred c n-are

s ne refuze

- Chiar c s-ar putea, dac-ar vrea dumnealui.

Felix se nvoi bucuros, i puin dup aceea, cnd i se pru

mai priincios, ddu bun seara i se retrase.

Cnd ajunse n geamalcul de sus, care privea spre

grdin, vzu pe Otilia stnd la o fereastr deschis.

Conversaia de jos i incidentul cu pianul o indispusese

probabil, i acum se refugiase aici, fr s ias din raza lui

Pascalopol.

Zrind pe Felix, Otilia l chem n oapt.

- Ce faci? Vino aici!

Cnd Felix se rezem de canatul ferestrei, Otilia i spuse

tot ncet:

- Nu tii ce viper e tanti Aglae asta! Uf!

Ca i cnd ar fi bnuit o inimiciie, Aglae, care-i zrise n

treact sub sclipirile lunii, zise tare de jos:

56

- Otilio, s-l aduci mine pe dumnealui la noi!

- Da tanti rspunse cu o miere teatral Otilia, fcnd o

strmbtur cu neles lui Felix are s-i par foarte bine lui

Titi!

ns numaidect adug ncet lui Felix:

- S vezi ce prost e!

Pascalopol implor pe Otilia s se coboare; Aglae, ca s

nu supere prea mult pe moier, se asocie i ea, conciliant:

- Vino jos, Otilia ce stai acolo?

Otilia fcu un semn de adio lui Felix, care intr n odaia

lui i se culc. Trziu de tot, cnd se trezi o clip din somn,

ntunericul se subia crepuscular i un coco cnta. Lui Felix i

se pru c aude trosnitura uii gotice de la intrare i, puin dup

aceea rostogilirea roilor unei trsuri.

(Enigma Otiliei, Chapter II pages 31-32)

The remark/opinion was scandallously unfair and had

clearly come out of spite / ill-will. Pascalopol tried to calm

things down

Youre in a bad mood today, Madam / Madame Aglae.

Miss Otilia plays wonderfully, she is an artist.

Aurica looked down biting her lips.

Youre being courteous as usual, came Aglaes new

57

stinger. Youd better tell me what to do about Titi because Im

very upset. They failed him again they are persecuting him, as

hes shy, he isnt so forward as others are hes also been ill.

Maybe you know someone who could put in a good word this

autumn.

We will by all means, Pascalopol offered himself to

help, obliging as always but I think someone should tutor

him, just to make sure.

Felix was sitting on a bench near the kiosk, in the

moonlight and couldnt make up his mind and leave as long as

Otilia was still around. All of a sudden he heard Auricas

hollow voice purposely persuasive.

We can ask Mr. Felix, mother, I think he wont turn us

down.

He might really help us, if he would.

Felix gladly agreed and, a little bit later, when he felt it

was the right time, he said good-night and left.

When he reached the glass verandah, which looked out

into the garden, he could see Otilia sitting at an open window.

The conversation downstairs and the incident about the piano

must have irritated her and now she had taken refuge there,

without Pascalopol losing sight of her.

Catching sight of Felix, Otilia whispered him to get closer:

58

What are you doing? Come here!

When Felix leaned against the wing of the window, Otilia

also whispered:

You dont have the slightest idea of what a viper this

aunt Aglae of mine is! Uf!

As if she had suspected Otilias hostility, Aglae,

catching a glimpse of them under the moonlight, said loudly

from downstairs:

Otilia, bring him tomorrow to visit us

Yes, auntie answered Otilia with faked hypocrisy /

unctuously, making faces to Felix Titi would be very glad.

But immediately she whispered to Felix:

Youll see how dull he is / Just wait to see how dull he

is / You should see how dull he is

Pascalopol begged Otilia to come downstairs; for fear

the landowner might get upset, Aglae, joined him compromisingly:

Come down, Otilia, why on earth are you sitting there?

Otilia waved good-bye to Felix, when he entered his

room and went to bed. Very late at might, when he suddenly

woke up, the darkness seemed to fade away little by little and a

rooster was singing. Felix seemed to hear the crack of the front

Gothic door and, shortly afterwards the rolling down of the

wheels of carriage

59

Text 2

A doua zi la mas, Otilia fu tot att de senin, seara

nu veni deloc. O mhnire mare cuprinse pe Felix, o sil de

toate i prin cap i trecur idei extravagante. Se gndea s lase

totul balt, s fug undeva n lume, ca fochist pe un vapor. Ii

nchipuia consternarea Otiliei, regretul ei de a-l fi fcut s

sufere i s plece, o vede plngnd. Melodrama asta

inexorabil i mica toate fibrele sufletului i prefcu

descurajarea ntr-o mare durere consolatoare. i chinuia totui

mintea cu fel de fel de ipoteze: Otilia a gsit scrisoarea, dar n-a

bnuit de la cine este, i-a nchipuit c e vreo glum, vreo

hrtie veche a lui Felix; a gsit-o i, distrat, a aruncat-o fr s-

o desfac; n-a gsit-o deloc, scrisoarea cznd undeva printre

lucruri; a citit-o dar nu-l iubete pe Felix. Ipoteza din urm

aprindea gelozia n inima lui Felix.

(Enigma Otiliei, chapter VIII page 104 )

Next day at lunch time Otilia was as serene as before;

in the evening she didnt come at all. Felix was seized with a

deep feeling of sorrow, feeling sick and tired of everything and

absurd ideas crossed his mind. He was thinking to drop

everything, run to some place of the world and be a stoker on a

60

ship. He could imagine Otilias perplexity, the regret of having

him suffer and of making him go away; he could see her

crying. This inexorable melodrama moved him deeply and his

disappointment became an intense comforting pain. All kind of

assumptions tortured his mind. Otilia had found the letter but

she couldnt imagined who the sender might be; she thought it

was a joke, or an old paper of Felixs / belonging to Felix; or

she had found it but absent minded as she was she threw it

away without even opening it; maybe she didnt find the letter

at all since he letter could fall through her stuff; or maybe she

had read it but she didnt have any feeling for Felix.The last

assumption made Felix jealous.

Text 3

Ceea ce l ntuneca pe Felix, dndu-i oarecare doz de

mizantropie era indiferena tuturor, chiar a colegilor de

universitate, pentru orice atitudine intelectual, pentru orice

nflcrare ce n-avea un scop imediat, terestru. La Iai, n

internat, discuta cu aprindere cu colegii, chiar n pat, dup

stingerea luminii, probleme pe care cteodat nu le nelegea

nimeni bine, dar care i mbtau dndu-le mndrii de filosofi.

Problemele erau formulate n chipul ntrebrilor? (ce e viaa?

61

ce e moartea?), aa cum le ntlneau prin brouri. Unul pusese

odat problema: ce e femeia, i toi se strduir s dea soluiile

cele mai extravagante, nimeni nu fcu nici cea mai mic glum

indecent i nici mcar vreo aluzie la problema sexualitii.

Erau unii care puneau mna pe reviste i-i scoteau din

ele teme necunoscute celorlali, pe care le dezlegau cu soluii

tot din revist, spre ciuda colegilor de disput, care voiau s

tie de unde furaser ideile. ntr-o noapte discutar despre

Dumnezeu. Afar ploua cu gleata i tuna, i unii din biei mai

fricoi i mai puin dialecticieni, tremurau de fric i chiar se

nchinau pe sub ptur, ncredinai c o astfel de discuie poate

fi primejdioas pe aa vreme.

(Enigma Otiliei, chapter XIV pages 225-226 )

What was making Felix gloomy and to a certain extent

misanthropical was everybodys indifference, even that of his

university colleagues/ college mates, towards any intellectual

attitude, any passion whose aim was hardly touchable,

material. In Iai, at the hostel he would argue with his room

fellows, even after they had switched off the light, about topics

which could never be well understood, but which made them

feel as proud as if they were philosophers. The topics

62

/problems were put in question form (what is life? what is

death?) as they had found them in leaflets.

One of them had once raised the question what is a

women? and everybody tried to come up with the most

extravagant solutions, but none of them made the least indecent

joke or even to hint at the problem of sexuality/ the slightest

remark to sexuality.

Some of them would get hold of different leaflets and

they took unknown topics from there, which they solved using

clues from the same papers, to their collegues spite who would

like to know where those solutions/ideas had been taken from.

One night they discussed about God. Outside it was raining

heavily and the thunder could be heard so some of boys,

frightened and less dialecticians were trembling and even they

were saying prayers/crossing themselves without being seen,

convinced that such a discussion might be perilous on a stormy

night/weather.

63

3.2. Text Analysis

Enigma Otiliei

de G. Clinescu

Judecata era de o

nedreptate scandaloas i

se vedea c nu vine dect

din rutate. Pascalopol

ncerc s mblnzeasc

situaia.

Enigmatic Otilia

by G. Clinescu

The remark/opinion was

scandallously unfair and had

clearly come out of spite / ill-

will. Pascalopol tried to calm

things down.

In translating each instance of a text we should first of

all observe the possible equivalence between the ST and TT.

The first word of the Romanian version judecata was translated

by the remark, not the judgement, because the latter would

match neither the meaning nor the register of the original. In

terms of pragmatic equivalence it means the opinion / remark

and not an act or an instance of judging. Translating it as The

judgement was unfair would have been a clear case of non-

equivalence at the semantic level of the context.

The Romanian era de o nedreptate scandaloas was

rendered through was scandalously unfair. Here we can speak

about a case of non-equivalence in point of grammar. The

64

noun + adjective structure in the original nedreptate

scandaloas was rendered by adverb + adjective in English.

A variant which I could also suggest for the sake of symmetry

between the two languages was the remark was of an

outrageous injustice. Outrageous is too strong as compared to

the original meaning and the choice of injustice is too formal if

we take into account the dictionary definition of this word: the

quality or fact of being unjust; inequity; violation of the rights

of others (Webster).

Even the Romanian verbal nucleus se vedea was

translated using an adverb in the TT. It is also a case of non-

equivalence. The meaning of the impersonal reflexive

construction in the ST was rendered in English by the adverb

clearly which I chose in order to match the register. If I had

used it was obvious instead of clearly this would be translated

as era evident. On the other hand, the use of one could see is

very formal and sounds definitional.

Another case of non-equivalence is to be discussed

here: c nu vine dect din rutate - it had come only out of

spite. Spite was chosen instead of other possible variants such

as malice (the desire or intention to deliberately harm someone:

Longman); Sadness i.e. the desire of causing problems or

doing harm; meanness unkindness or nastiness; ill-will

65

strong dislike or hostility. None of them matches exactly the

semantic and pragmatic dimension of the original. As far as the

choice of the tense is concerned, there is also a non-

equivalence because Past Perfect was used instead of Simple

Past, since the relationship of anteriority is obvious se vedea c

nu venise dect din rutate. Following also the rules of the

sequence of tenses I chose to translate it as it had come.

Even if we can not speak about total or perfect

equivalence, such a sample is to be found in rendering the

Romanian s mblnzeasc situaia in to calm things down. I

also wanted to translate it using to calm down the situation, but

this expresses a subjective state or feeling which does not

match the context.

Another option would be to calm down the spirits, but

the spirits refer to the individuals rather than to the

circumstances seen as a whole an individual as characterized

by a given attitude, disposition, character, action (Webster).

So the meaning of the word situaie used in STL is most

adequately rendered by things in TT.

66

- Cucoan Aglae, azi eti

ru dispus. Domnioara Otilia

cnt minunat, e o artist.

Aurica ls capul n jos,

strngndu-i buzele ntre dini.

- Aa eti dumneata,

galant, mai arunc Aglae o

neptur. Mai bine mi-ai

spune ce s fac cu Titi c sunt

foarte suprat. L-a lsat

corigent iar... l persecut

fiindc el e timid, nu e

ndrzne ca alii... a fost i

bolnav. Poate cunoti pe

cineva, s pun o vorb bun

la toamn.

Youre in a bad mood today,

Madam / Madame Aglae. Miss

Otilia plays wonderfully, she is an

artist.

Aurica looked down biting

her lips. Youre courteous as

usual, came Aglaes new

stinger. Youd better tell me

what to do about Titi because

Im very upset. They failed him

again they are persecuting

him, as hes shy, he isnt so

forward as others are hes

also been ill. Maybe you know

someone who could put in a

good word this autumn.

In the theoretical part of my paper I have discussed

about cultural equivalence. In this fragment I have dealt which

such an issue. Cocoan was translated as Madam, which is a

polite term of addressing a woman, formerly used to a woman

of rank or authority belonging to a high social class. It was

finally chosen instead of maam, which is too informal as a

consequence of the fact that formerly was used by the natives,

67

belonging to the lower classes after the family name; Madame

would be another choice but it is used as a title for a French-

speaking woman, especially a married one. Thus in this context

madam is a cultural equivalent.

The Romanian phrase Azi eti ru dispus was rendered

by Youre in a bad mood today. Other possible equivalents

would be: to be in low spirits (to be sad, less cheerful), to be

low-spirited, to be down in the mouth (informal-looking very

unhappy) or to be in a foul need (to be very angry or upset).

These would have been quite inappropriate because they have a

different contextual distribution. Mood refers to the way you

feel at a particular time, so to be in a bad mood means to be

annoyed, angry and matches the semantic dimension of the

original implying a case of semantic equivalence.

E o artist Shes an artist. Other variants suggested here can be: 1. Shes a real artist but this would be a semantic

gain. 2. Shes quite an artist, isnt she? due to the high

frequency of the question-tags in English, but it would change

the pragmatic dimension of the context. As for the other part of

the sentence Domnioara Otilia cnt minunat it has a clear

English equivalent plays wonderfully.

Non-equivalence is also found in the translation of ls

capul n jos rendered by looked down (in point of meaning),

68

because lower ones eyes better corresponds to i cobor

privirea which is the real meaning here.

Neither bend ones head (to curve), nor hang ones

head (to look ashamed and embarrassed) could be accepted as

equivalents because I think they match completely different

contexts.

Strngdu-i buzele ntre dini was rendered by biting

her lips, but it better corresponds to a-i muca buzele. It is a

case of idiomatic non-equivalence given that its primary

meaning is to try to keep calm and not show your feelings in a

situation when most people would become upset. My first

choice was squeezing her lips between her teeth because for

example Levichis Dictionary gives to squeeze, to press as

equivalents for the Romanian a strnge, but I think they cannot

be used with reference to ones lips. To squeeze means to

press something firmly inwards (Longman); to press means

to push something, to try to persuade somebody. None of

these match the Romanian meaning i muc buzele.

Galant translated as courteous seems to me quite an

equivalent translation since the English term means having

good manners and respect for the people. A confusable trap

would be here the use of courtly which means graceful and

polite.

69

Another case of non-equivalence is to be found in mai

arunc Aglae o neptur came Aglaes new stinger. In terms of adequacy and register, stinger is a very good

equivalent for neptur. Another variant is biting remark. As

we can see, both sting and biting remark collocate very well

with drop but the Romanian version was a arunca not a lsa

s-i scape, that is why to drop cannot be used here.

E.g. Aglae dropped a bitter/biting remark was a

possible version.

Another variant which I had in mind was gave a

sarcastic reply but the verbal phrase to give a reply belongs to

informal English whereas the adjective sarcastic better

matches the formal style so it could be a shift of register within

the same phrase.

In order to match the register I could use biting instead

of sarcastic, but it still wouldnt correspond to the original.

Reply is not a very good equivalent in terms of collocability as

well as in terms of the co-text; reply would make us think that

the remark/the stinger was addressed to Pascalopol, not to

Otilia.

The Romanian mai bine mi-ai spune which was

translated as youd better tell me seems to be quite adequate in

terms of register and semantics than the too formal variant with

70

suggest followed by analytical subjunctive that I had in mind

when translating:

E.g. I suggest that you should tell me, or you should tell me what where the modal should expresses the speakers

advice or recommendation. So in this case I used quite an

equivalent translation of the syntagm.

Suprat was translated by upset meaning unhappy

and worried because something unpleasant or disappointing

has happened (Longman). Other variants which I could

suggest were: angry with or angry about, sad, furious,

irritated, but none of them would match the semantic and

pragmatic dimensions of the context.

L-a lsat corigent iar... they failed him again. I preferred the transitive verb to fail somebody, used in its

connotative meaning (to declare a person unsuccessful in a test,

course of study) to the more formal and explanatory to have to

go in for a second examination given by Levichi. Moreover, I

consider to be a case of syntactic non-equivalence because the

agent is expressed in the singular and it has a rather vague

reference. I translated l-a by they used with an indefinite

value.

ndrzne was translated as forward because it implies

making oneself unduly prominent or bringing oneself to

71

notice with too much assurance bgcios, obraznic. In terms

of context is more appropriate as compared to bold suggesting

imprudence, shamelessness and immodesty neruinat; or

compared to brazen- imprudent suggesting the shame, together

with a defiant manner. Other suggested variants would be:

insolent meaning rude and disrespectful, contemptuously

impertinent, insulting impertinent, insolent; then presumptuous employing overconfidence, taking too much for

granted- ncrezut, ngmfat, obraznic; and cheeky- imprudent,

insolent which for sure would not match the context in terms of

register, belonging to informal English.

The Romanian s pun o vorb bun was rendered by

who could put in a good word. Other variants or possible

equivalents would be: speak up for somebody, or speak a good

word for somebody, which both imply actually uttering,

delivering a discourse, which is not the case in this context; or

the variants give somebody ones good word, or recommend

somebody which imply that the recommended person is of

confidence, consequently having a different distribution. Thus

the translation who could put in a good word would be just

fine.

72

- Punem, punem, cum s

nu se oferi Pascalopol,

ntotdeauna ndatoritor dar

eu zic c pn atuncea s-l

prepare cineva, ca s fim mai

siguri.

Felix edea pe o banc n