LESSON 13 UNIT 6 (05/11/2015)

For homework, see last slide

• Translation of medical text

• Unit 6 (HM) Theoretical points

• Translating discourse markers in conversation

HOMEWORK: Italian translation of medical text

Physical examination: This 24 year old white female

appeared acutely ill. She was thin and febrile with an oral

temperature of 39.4°C. Respiration rate was 24/min and was

shallow, blood pressure was 160/100 mmHg, pulse rate was

110/min, and the patient was diaphoretic (= sweating). She

had small erythematous macules on her face, neck, shoulders,

and upper arms. These lesions were pink and slightly raised.

Their diameters were about 0.5 to 1.5 cm. Around the

exposed area of the neck and chest, the lesions were

confluent. There were clearly visible telangiectasias seen in

many of these spots. The lower lip was markedly swollen, the

patient could barely open her mouth, and the lip had served

several bluish and prominent changes. The patient reported a

burning sensation in all of these cutaneous alterations.

HOMEWORK: Italian translation of medical text

Esame obiettivo: questa donna di 24 anni, che mostrava una

patologia in fase acuta, si presentava magra, con una temperatura

orale di 39,4°C. Il respiro era superficiale e di 24 atti al minuto, la

pressione arteriosa era 160/100 mmHg, la frequenza del polso era

di 110 batti al minuto. La paziente era diaforetica. Presentava

piccole macchie eritematose sulla faccia, sul collo, sulle spalle e

sulla parte superiore delle braccia. Tali lesioni erano di colore rosa

e leggermente sollevate. I loro diametro variava da circa 0,5 cm a

1.5 cm. Le lesioni localizzate nelle superficie esposta del collo e

del torace si presentavano confluenti. In molte di queste macchie

erano chiaramente visibili delle telangectasie. Il labbro inferiore

era gonfio al punto tale che la paziente poteva a stento aprire la

bocca, e presentava molte alterazioni bluastre e prominenti. La

paziente riferiva una sensazione di bruciore localizzata in ognuna

di queste alterazioni cutanee.

Physical examination: This 24 year old white female appeared

acutely ill. She was thin and febrile with an oral temperature of

39.4°C.

Esame obiettivo: questa donna di 24 anni, che mostrava una

patologia in fase acuta, si presentava magra, con una

temperatura orale di 39,4°C.

- 2 sentences in English but1 sentence in Italian with relative

clause: ‘che mostrava una patologia in fase acuta’

- appeared mostrava; was si presentava. ||| Simple past

l’imperfetto (Faini 121: questo tempo verbale conferisce una

sorta di staticità alla narrazione, sviluppandola su un unico

piano temporale.)

- thin and febrile magra (reduction)

- 39.4°C. 39,4°C. (comma instead of point: be careful with

different conventions for numbering)

Respiration rate was 24/min and was shallow, blood

pressure was 160/100 mmHg, pulse rate was 110/min, and

the patient was diaphoretic

Il respiro era superficiale e di 24 atti al minuto, la pressione

arteriosa era 160/100 mmHg, la frequenza del polso era di

110 batti al minuto. La paziente era diaforetica.

- Il respiro (article in Italian ).

- 1 sentence in English; 2 sentences in Italian. The single

sentence ‘The patient was diaphoretic’ would be too

brusque (staccato) in English

There were clearly visible telangiectasias seen in many of

these spots.

In molte di queste macchie erano chiaramente visibili delle

telangectasie.

- Different word order so as to achieve same emphasis of

telangiectasias / telangectasie.

- Existential verb: ‘There were…’ in English. Used to

introduce new information relating to the existence of

something (Nelson 118).

- ‘delle telangectasie’ placed in final sentence-position in

Italian.

The lower lip was markedly swollen, the patient could

barely open her mouth, and the lip had served several

bluish and prominent changes. The patient reported a

burning sensation in all of these cutaneous alterations.

Il labbro inferiore era gonfio al punto tale che la paziente

poteva a stento aprire la bocca, e presentava molte

alterazioni bluastre e prominenti. La paziente riferiva una

sensazione di bruciore localizzata in ognuna di queste

alterazioni cutanee.

..was markedly swollen, the patient could barely open her

mouth,… (= 2 clauses)

… era gonfio al punto tale che la paziente poteva a stento

aprire la bocca… (1 clause)

UNIT 6 HM (Dynamic equivalence and the receptor

of the message)

The previous unit focused on the analysis of meaning

(denotative, connotative, collocative) at the level of

individual words and phrases

This unit widens the focus so as to define meaning in

terms of broader contextual categories such as culture

and audience in both the ST and the TT.

More specifically, the focus is on the need to respond

to the communicative requirements of the text receiver

and, by implication, to the purpose of the translation,

without necessarily losing sight of the communicative

preferences of the original message producer or the

function of the original text (HM 40)

UNIT 6 HM (Dynamic equivalence and the receptor of the

message)

Abandoning the classical terms such as ‘literal’, ‘free’ and

‘faithful’ translation, the Bible translation scholar Eugene

Nida made a distinction between formal and dynamic

equivalence:

Formal equivalence (See Nida text in HM 167). This

‘focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and

content. One is concerned that the message in the receptor

language should match as closely as possible the different

elements in the source language’ (‘Receptor language’ here =

the target language.) Formal equivalence, which Nida later

called ‘formal correspondence’, is oriented towards the ST

structure, which exerts strong influence in determining

accuracy and correctness.

Dynamic equivalence: Dynamic equivalence, or what

Nida later called ‘functional’equivalence, is based on

what he calls ‘the principle of equivalent effect’, where

the relationship between ‘the receptor and the message

should be substantially the same as that which existed

between the original receptors and the message’.

Dynamic equivalence continued:

The message has to be tailored to the receptor’s

(audience’s) linguistic needs and cultural expectations.

So the message has to aim ‘at complete naturalness of

expression’. For Nida, the goal of dynamic equivalence is

to find ‘the closest natural equivalent to the source

language message. Adjustments of grammar, of lexis and

of cultural references are essential for achieving this

naturalness. The TT language should not show

interference from the SL, and the foreignness of the ST

setting is minimised.

More simply, dynamic equivalence consists of four basic

requirements:

• making sense

• conveying the spirit and manner of the original

• having an natural and easy form of expression

• producing a response that is similar to the response of

the SL and ST audience.

What implications does this have for translating

conversations?

Conversation out of context is almost opaque. (Try

listening to /translating the Nixon Watergate tapes!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oe3OgU8W0s

http://www.nixonlibrary.gov/forresearchers/find/tapes/wa

tergate/trial/transcripts.php

You need to be able to assign reference when there are:

• Pronouns (him, her, them, etc.)

• Generic words (do, happen, the thing, etc.)

• Ellipses (Yes he did. ||| That’s why. ||| How often? )

You also need knowledge of the culturally specific

context:

‘Suppose we have a grand jury proceeding. Would that,

would that, what would that do to the Ervin thing?

‘You do that on a grand jury, we could then have a much

cause in terms of saying ‘Look, this is a grand jury, in

which the prosecutor…’.

You may also need to translate dialogues where the

speakers expect listeners to quickly infer conclusions

with very little mental effort. Consider the vast amount of

knowledge that is required to understand what he means

in the following conversation:

Woman: I’m leaving you.

Man: Who is he?

(Pinker 227)

You may also need to translate aspects of ‘phatic

communion’ (Malinowski). Sometimes called ‘small

talk’, gossip or ‘chit-chat’, phatic communion is talk with

apparently little meaningful content, e.g., the English talk

about the weather. But phatic communion has the

important functions of creating solidarity or social

bonding, and defusing the potential hostility of silence.

You may also need to translate aspects of ‘phatic

communion’ that involve use of the following ‘discourse

markers’:

•Ok so: marks agreement and functions as a metalinguistic

operator (i.e., it can mark a stage in the discourse such as the

beginning).

•actually, maybe (can mark opinion, disagreement,

suggestion or topic change)

•Well, I mean (marks more precise information)

•you’re like, / and like (marks speaker’s opinion and point

of view. Marker of subjectivity and evaluation)

•I’m kinda like (marks approximation and vague reference)

•really uhm (marks surprise)

• and then just, you know,…. just = can function as an

intensifier of the information that follows, but not always. It’s

difficult to find a core semantic meaning of ‘just’. The

meaning(s) of ‘just’ emerge(s) from a complex interaction

between this word, the other elements in the utterance and the

contexts of situation and culture. Here, ‘just’ functions as a

metalinguistic operator: it signals that more precise

information will follow and it marks an expression of speaker

attitude.

• you know marks an appeal to COMMON GROUND (i.e.,

knowledge that the speaker and listener already accept and

share), and it requests (or presumes?) listener’s agreement.

• Yeah ||| Mmm

•etc., etc.

For more information about English discourse markers see K.

Aijmer, English Discourse Particles, Evidence from a Corpus,

John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2002.

EXAMPLE (= HOMEWORK):

Click on the link below, and watch and listen to a

conversation between two young people about the

differences between American and British English. They

use the above types of discourse markers to create phatic

communion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua7nyAaf3pE

How would you translate the discourse markers on the

previous two slides? (Don’t try to translate the complete

conversation you have just heard.)