Remerciez-le!

Remerciez @Admin pour avoir partagé cet document gratuitement, de la manière la plus simple, en partageant sur les réseaux sociaux.

Tous droits réservés © Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal, 2002 Ce documen

Tous droits réservés © Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal, 2002 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne. https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit. Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l’Université de Montréal, l’Université Laval et l’Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. https://www.erudit.org/fr/ Document généré le 7 jan. 2021 07:14 Meta Journal des traducteurs Translators' Journal Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical Example Ana María Rojo López Volume 47, numéro 3, septembre 2002 URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/008018ar DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/008018ar Aller au sommaire du numéro Éditeur(s) Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal ISSN 0026-0452 (imprimé) 1492-1421 (numérique) Découvrir la revue Citer cet article Rojo López, A. (2002). Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical Example. Meta, 47 (3), 312–350. https://doi.org/10.7202/008018ar Résumé de l'article Ce travail essaie d’illustrer quelques-unes des contributions que la théorie sémantique connue sous le nom de « Sémantique des Schémas » (Frame Semantics) peut apporter à la traduction d’éléments culturels. L’étude commence par une définition des objectifs et des concepts de base qui constituent notre modèle d’analyse. Ensuite, une typologie des schémas, qui peut être très utile pour l’analyse de nos exemples, est proposée. Puis cette typologie est alors appliquée à l’analyse de plusieurs exemples extraits du roman de David Lodge Small World et de sa traduction à l’espagnol El mundo es un pañuelo. Finalement, un résumé des principales conclusions de l’étude est proposé. Applying Frame Semantics to Translation: A Practical Example ana maría rojo lópez Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain RÉSUMÉ Ce travail essaie d’illustrer quelques-unes des contributions que la théorie sémantique connue sous le nom de «Sémantique des Schémas» (Frame Semantics) peut apporter à la traduction d’éléments culturels. L’étude commence par une définition des objectifs et des concepts de base qui constituent notre modèle d’analyse. Ensuite, une typologie des schémas, qui peut être très utile pour l’analyse de nos exemples, est proposée. Puis cette typologie est alors appliquée à l’analyse de plusieurs exemples extraits du roman de David Lodge Small World et de sa traduction à l’espagnol El mundo es un pañuelo. Fina- lement, un résumé des principales conclusions de l’étude est proposé. ABSTRACT This work intends to illustrate some of the contributions the semantic theory known as ‘Frame Semantics’ can make to the translation of cultural elements. The study starts by defining the objectives and basic concepts that constitute our model of analysis. Sec- ondly, a typology of frames for the analysis of our examples is proposed. Later on, this typology is applied to the analysis of a number of examples extracted from David Lodge’s novel Small World and its translation into Spanish El Mundo es un Pañuelo. Finally, we summarize the main conclusion of the study. MOTS-CLÉS/KEYWORDS frame semantics, generic frames, institutional frames, social frames, translation of cul- tural elements 1. Preliminaries: aims and basic concepts Before proceeding with the analysis of the selected corpus, it is necessary to define the aims of the study and the basic concepts on which our analysis is based. 1.1. Aims The aim of this work is to show some of the contributions of the semantic theory known as Frame Semantics to the translation of cultural elements in narrative texts. The study focuses on the analysis of the problems posed by certain elements charac- teristic of a given culture when translated into another language in a different cultural environment. It is not our intention to set up a taxonomy of frames that can explain all the potential problems posed by the translation of cultural elements. Neither is it our intention to dictate the translator’s behaviour by formulating translation prin- ciples that often do not work in particular cases. Our aim is mainly to apply the principles of Frame Semantics to the translation of a limited number of cultural elements in order to illustrate the benefits of the approach for the translator’s task. Meta, XLVII, 3, 2002 312 Meta, XLVII, 3, 2002 In short, it could be said that the study we propose has two basic aims: (a) one more general, which consists in showing the contributions of a linguistic theory to the translation of cultural elements; and (b) a more specific aim within the previous one, which intends to examine the contributions certain types of frames can make to the analysis of a series of examples of cultural elements and their translations. 1.2. Basic concepts Once the objectives have been established, we proceed to describe what we under- stand in our model for: translation unit, equivalence, context and the translator’s role. 1.2.1. Translation unit Delimiting the unit of translation has been, and still is, one of the most problematic aspects in any translation model. However, defining the unit of translation seems necessary to establish a clear notion of equivalence. In general terms, the definition of the unit of translation has ranged between the tendency to atomize of those seek- ing lexical equivalence and the more holistic attitude of those looking for textual equivalence.1 The former often results in artificial translations and the latter can sometimes be too vague and not very practical to work with the whole text. These problems have led scholars to establish units of an analytical nature which are de- fined a posteriori, i.e., after the translation process, by comparing ST and TT. Santoyo (1986) and Rabadán (1991) call these units ‘translemas’ and define them as units of a relational nature that do not exist a priori, since they are only valid for the compared texts. The fact that these ‘translemas’ or translation units are established a posteriori does not mean that we cannot previously formulate a general hypothesis that serves as a guide in our study, functioning as tertium comparationis in the analysis. Taking into account that this work deals with the translation of cultural elements, the hypothesis that acts as ‘intermediating construct’2 between ST and TT is the notion of ‘frame.’ Frames are here considered as structures of knowledge that represent the world view of a particular society, that is, its beliefs, values and emotions, its prototypes of people and things, of sequences of situations and events, its social scenarios and the metaphorical and metonymical structure of thought. This tertium comparationis has been the starting point for the analysis, helping us to identify the internal units in the ST and TT. These units have been labelled ‘cultural elements’ and include any word, expression or textual segment that activates a frame because it denotes, implies or symbolizes any cultural aspect of human life, its environment, its relationships or its products. In this sense, our definition includes Newmark’s (1988:95) ‘cultural words,’ but it is not limited to these. Newmark’s ‘cultural words’ mainly refer to aspects of the so- called ‘material culture’; however, our definition of ‘cultural element’ also comprises all those linguistic categories that need to be interpreted in the cultural environment of the ST, even if they do not refer directly to a cultural dimension. They are mostly contextualized stylistic resources whose interpretation depends on the reader’s ability to activate certain cultural frames; we are referring to numerous cases of idioms, colloquial and taboo expressions, play on words and even metaphors and metonymies. 1.2.2. Functional equivalence Having established the notion of translation unit, we can formulate a possible defini- tion of equivalence adapted to the objectives of our study. Translators may dream of an ideal translation identical to the ST. However, when translating they have to accept that most of the time it is impossible to achieve a total identity between the ST and TT. But even whe achieving a complete identity seems impossible, the translator can still establish a notion of equivalence or a correspondence hypothesis between two tex- tual units which may serve as a guide in the translation process.3 Considering that this study deals with the translation of cultural elements, we propose a notion of equivalence based on the notion of frame and the function car- ried out by the cultural element. As Gutt points out (1991:10), the function of a text or textual fragment has surely been one of the criteria most frequently used to define translation equivalence. Shuttleworth and Cowie (1997) define ‘functional equiva- lence’ as: a term used to refer to the type of equivalence reflected in a TT which seeks to adapt the function of the original to suit the specific context in and for which it was pro- duced. (Shuttleworth and Cowie 1997, p. 64) Generally speaking, when translators find a cultural element, they assign it a function within an overall plan and use this function to look for the solutions they consider appropriate. Such solutions may or may not be ‘acceptable’ to the audience of the TT. Thus, we are not dealing with a total equivalence, but with a correspon- dence that may or may not be ‘acceptable’ to the target audience. uploads/Litterature/ applying-frame-semantics-to-translation 1 .pdf