THE
PROCESS OF TRANSLATING
23
see it in your mind? Can you
visualise ii? If you cannot, you have to 'supplement
1
the
linguistic level, the text level with the referential level, the factual level with the necessary
additional information (no more) from this level of reality, the facts of the matter. In real life,
what is the setting or scene, who are the actors or agents, what is the purpose? This may or
may not take you away temporarily from the words in the text. And certainly it is all
LOO
easy to immerse yourself in language and to detach yourself from the reality, real or
imaginary, that is being described. Far more acutely than writers wrestling with only one
language, you become aware of the awful
gap between words and objects, sentences and
actions (or processes'.. grammar and moods (or attitudes). You have to gain perspective
{distacco, recul'Aa stand back from the language and have an image of the reality behind the
text, a reality for which you, and not the author (unless it is an expressive or an authoritative
text), are responsible and
liable.
The referential goes hand in hand with the textual level. All languages have
polysemous words and structures which can be finally solved only on the referential level,
beginning
with a few multi-purpose, overloaded prepositions and conjunctions, through
dangling participles ('reading the paper, the dog barked loudly') to general words. The
referential level, where you mentally sort out the text, is built up out of,
based on, the
clarification of all linguistic difficulties and, where appropriate, supplementary information
from the 'encyclopaedia' - my symbol for any work of reference or textbook. (Thus in
pour le
passage de Flore, you find that Flore/Flora was an Italic goddess of flowers and gardens. As
it is in Claudel you translate: 'for the goddess Flora to pass' and leave the rest to the reader.)
You build up the referential picture in your mind when you transform the SL into the TL text;
and, being a professional, you are responsible for the truth of this picture.
Does this mean, as Seleskovitch claims, that
l
the (SL) words disappear' or that you
l
deverbalize the concepts' (Delisle)? Not at all, you are working continuously on two levels,
the
real and the linguistic, life and language, reference and sense, but you write, you
'compose
1
, on the linguistic level, where your job is to achieve the greatest possible
correspondence, referentially and pragmatically, with the words and sentences of the SI- text.
However tempting it is to remain on that simpler, usually simplified layman's level of reality
(the message and its function^ you have
to force yourself back, in as far as the readership can
stand it, into the particularities of the source language meaning-
Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn: