Declaration this thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or tertiary institution, and to the best of my knowledge and belief

We have made an attempt to make an investigation into the equivalence between English and Vietnamese translation of insurance terms in US HIplans. The study has been kept on the right track to find the answers for the set research questions. In this part, we would like to briefly summarize translation methods, procedures and strategies employed to deal with groups of terms that have equivalents and the terms of non-equivalence group. We would also like to make some suggestions for the translation of HIterms in the US HIplans since we have thoroughly examined the current situation of the translation of the terms. Suggestions are made in terms of methods, procedures and strategies that can be best used to the purpose of terminology standardization.

Procedure: Either (i) automatic transposition (English nomimal group = Vietnamese nominal group) or (ii) rank-shift (English nominal group = Vietnamese clause)

Strategies: translated with the deletion or omission of the preposition ‘OF’

Procedure: Transference (usually transferred, sometimes decoded and translated)

Procedure: Transference, usually accompanied with a functional-descriptive equivalent in parentheses

Strategies and methods: Paraphrase OR Communicative method depending on the intended meaning of the term

Methods: Literal translation

As clearly seen in this study, it is no wonder why transference has gained much preference in the translation of technical terms in general, and of HI terms in particular. Naturally, however, this procedure has both advantages and disadvantages.

In terms of the advantages, it is of great help in dealing with non-equivalence problem since there are quite a few concepts unknown in the TL. In such cases, the translator has no option but to directly borrow the English word into the target language. One widely accepted benefit of employing this strategy is that it enables the translator to give a short, precise translation easily without having to go deeply into the meaning of the term, hence limiting or avoiding false translation, especially when the term in question is completely new. In addition, when the borrowed words are accompanied with functional-descriptive terms, the concern that it is impossible for the readership to induce or figure out the meaning of the term will no longer exist.

Regarding the disadvantages, the task of preserving the purity and clarity of Vietnamese and avoid attacking the national characteristics of terminology appears to be harder more than ever if borrowed or loan words are used frequently. Besides, the way these borrowed terms are read and written definitely, to more or lesser extent, make it difficult for readers, especially when a TL term as‘Medi-gap’ keeps exactly the same form in the SL.

Both sides considered, the advantages appear to overweigh the disadvantages, resulting in its popularity. The fact shows that those working in the field of insurance even use them without an explanation in the form of a functional-descriptive term.

3.2. Suggestion for transposition procedure

Different types of transposition are used to translate many groups of terms and to eliminate different problems. Undoubtedly, it is a useful translation procedure in the sense that it can help deal with the differences in word formation and structural patterns between the two languages.

This translation strategy is one of the effective options in dealing with non-equivalence problem. The concept the writer wishes to convey to the readership do not exist in the TL, and if it is dealt by some translation strategy, a certain loss of meaning may not be avoided. Moreover, this strategy is too useful to be outlawed since it can help clarify meaning and make the term in question comprehensible to the readership. However, as there is a trade-off between lengthy explanations with the economy of the translated version, the translator should always take into consideration this very fact. In so doing, he can guarantee this strategy is not abused.

With the heart of the meaning being the message in communicative translation, the method normally makes the text smoother, lighter, more idiomatic and easier to read. Communicative translation also finds its way through non-equivalence problem, making the seemingly impossible task of finding a TL equivalent for a term unknown in SL possible in several cases as ‘cafeteria plan-chương trình BHSK tự chọn’. The method allows the translator more freedom to manipulate his translation skill. More concretely, he may make a generous transfer of foreign elements into his own culture as well as his language necessary. Therefore, it is not by chance that many translators go for the method.

Though it is not always possible to state which method is better for a particular text, standardized language including terminology should be translated communicatively, whether a standardized equivalent exists or not, unless the term is used descriptively rather than operatively in the original text.

Nevertheless, one big problem of communicative translation is to decide to what extent one should simplify and therefore emphasize the basic message. If a technical term is oversimplified or the translator, in an attempt to further beautify his translated version, fails to fully transmit the intended meaning of the term, a certain degree of lost meaning is unavoidable. The way ‘domestic partners-bạn đời’ is translated into Vietnamese, which is analyzed in III.2.3, may serve as a typical example of the problem.

On balance, regardless of its problem, communicative translation has still gained its rightful place in the choice of translators. Nevetheless, if a certain loss of meaning is unavoidable as a trade-off with the aesthetic value, that is, the beautiful and natural sound as in some cases mentioned in III.2.3, it is suggested that the English version be added.

3.5. Suggestion for literal translation

Literal translation is the basic translation procedure in that translation starts from there. Put differently, it is the first step in translation. Many translators firstly translate the term or text in question literally to figure out its literal meaning before making the final version accurate, smoother, sound natural and most importantly, accessible to the readership. Clearly, if literal translation is employed as the only method in dealing with the terms in group 8, it is not the right choice of translators in that the translated versions are clumsy and incomprehensible. One may find it difficult to understand what is really meant by ‘tính có thể chuyển đổi được’ (portability), and some others may misunderstand the intended meaning allocated to ‘community rating’ when it is literally rendered into Vietnamese as ‘đánh giá cộng đồng’.

Inarguably, literal translation is out of question when there is any kind of translation problem as non-equivalence, especially non-equivalence above word level. It definitely fails to produce as nearly as possible the same effect on the intended readership as was produced on the readers of the original.

To conclude, it is a strong recommendation that translators should get away from literal translation unless the SL and TL meaning correspond more closely than any alternative.

Within limited time, we have not been able to collect all translated versions for comparison and analysis. However, we are fully aware that it is impossible to do so since in almost all the US states there are quite a few translators doing the translation of health plans into Vietnamese for Vietnamese community there.

What can still be done towards an exhaustive research into the equivalence between English and Vietnamese translation of insurance terms in US HI plans is the collection of terms of disability income insurance for analysis and induction.

As researchers, we ourselves have cherished a wish of finding as many terms of non-equivalence group as possible towards making a glossary of HI terms in the US insurance plans for use and reference among insurance circle.

1. 
   Bac, N.T. (2003). MA Thesis: A Study on the English-Vietnamese Translation of the Terminology in the Materials for Electronics and Electrical Engineering. VNU, College of Foreign Languages.
   
2. 
   Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation.London and New York: Routledge.
   
3. 
   Baker, M. (1998). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. Routledge.
   
4. 
   Bell, R.T. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice. New York: Longman Inc.
   
5. 
   Carford, J.C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translaiton. Oxford :OUP.
   
6. 
   Cẩn, N.T. (1999). Ngữ Pháp Tiếng Việt (Tiếng-Từ Ghép-Đoản Ngữ). NXB ĐHQG Hà Nội.
   
7. 
   Châu, Đ. H. (1981). Từ Vựng Ngữ Nghĩa Tiếng Việt. NXBGD.
   
8. 
   Châu, Đ.H. (1999). Các Bình Diện Của Từ và Từ Tiếng Việt. (In lần thứ ba). NXB ĐHQGHN.
   
9. 
   Chi, N.H & Thước, L. (1935). Sách Mẹo Tiếng Nam. Hà nội: NXB Lê Văn Tần (printed in Nguyễn Như Ý. 1996. Từ Điển Giải Thích Thuật Ngữ Ngôn Ngữ Học. Hà nội: NXBGD)
   
10. 
    Giáp, N.T. (1998). Từ Vựng Học Tiếng Việt. Hà Nội: NXB Đại Học và Trung Học Chuyên Nghiệp.
    
11. 
    Halliday, M.A.K (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Amold.
    
12. 
    Hatim, B and Mason, I. (1990). Discourse and the Translator. Essex: Longman.
    
13. 
    Hiền, T.T.T (2005) MA Thesis: A Study on English Compounds Terms and Their Vietnamese Equivalents in Information Technology. VNU, College of Foreign Languages.
    
14. 
    Koller, W. (1979). Equivalence in Translation Theory, in Chesterman, A. (1989). Readings in Translation Theory, Loimaan Kirjapaino.
    
15. 
    Lang, L.V. (1977). Về Vấn Đề Xây Dựng Thuật Ngữ Khoa Học. Hà Nội: NXB Lao Động và Xã Hội.
    
16. 
    Mai, N.T. (2003). Ma Thesis: A Study on the Translation of IFA Terminology between English and Vietnamese. VNU, College of Foreign Languages.
    
17. 
    Newmark, P. (1995). Approaches to Translation. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd.
    
18. 
    Newmark, P. (1995). A Textbook of Translation. B and Jo Enterprise Pte Ltd.
    
19. 
    Thomasson, M. HIin the United States. EH.Net Encyclopedia, edited by
    

20. 
    Vân, H.V. (1998). Một Số Vấn Đề Có Liên Quan Đến Việc Dịch Cụm Danh Từ Tiếng Anh Sang Tiếng Việt. Nội San Ngoại Ngữ Số 5-1998. Trường ĐHNN, ĐHQGHN.
    
21. 
    Venuti, L. (1995). The Translation Studies Reader. Routledge-London and New York.
    
22. 
    Ý, N.N. (1996). Từ Điển Giải Thích Thuật Ngữ Ngôn Ngữ Học. Hà Nội: NXBGD.