Analysing Irony for Translation

7/30/2019 Analysing Irony for Translation

1/18


2/18

Meta LIV, 1, 2009

Analysing Irony for Translation

raymond chakhachiro

University o Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia.@..

RSUM

Cet article tudie pour la traduction et la traductologie lutilit des classifcations etdescriptions gnrales de lironie manant des domaines de la critique littraire, de lathorie littraire et de la pragmatique. Lauteur suggre que les critres philosophiqueset gnriques adopts dans ces domaines ne peuvent tre appliqus lanalyse de liro-nie dans la traduction, bien que la traduction de lironie soit un procs dinterprtation

et de reormulation crative. Cest le cas en particulier quand on essaie de rendre lironiedans deux langues aux typologies direntes, telles que langlais et larabe, dans un typetextuel spcifque, comme le commentaire politique. La traduction de lironie exige uneapproche plus objective et applique susceptible didentifer les dispositis ormels etrhtoriques de lironie ; elle requiert, plus exactement, une analyse linguistique mmede mettre en relie, sur le plan de la phrase comme sur le plan du discours, la onctioncommunicative des textes dironie.

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the question o whether the classifcations and general descrip-tions o irony, as true as they may seem, are plausible enough or enquiries into areas

such as translation. The generic and philosophical analysis criteria provided by the liter-ary criticism, literary theory and pragmatic approaches hover around broad interpretivemodels o irony. These criteria are impractical or the analysis o irony or translationpurposes, although the translation o irony relies essentially on interpretation and creativereormulation. This is particularly the case when dealing with typologically distant lan-guages, such as Arabic and English, in a specifc text-type. To be able to work withironic texts there is a need or a more objective and applicable approach, which consid-ers the identifcation o ormal and rhetorical devices o ironic texts, hence a linguisticanalysis that explains the communicative unction o these devices at both the utteranceand discourse structure levels.

MOTS-CLS/KEYWORDSirony, stylistics, discourse, speech acts, cooperative principle

1. Introduction

I , b . T b x -. T b . B -

(H 1977), q (N 1964), (N 1988) b . B b . I , ,


3/18

x b q . H, b q q b -x .

,

b E , Ab, b . R x b -. D , b x x (PC) Ab E b A b .

2. Te concept of irony in literary theory and pragmatic studies

x , b , ,

, b b. T b PC, x , b b W, Ab PC A . M (1990) E E , . H Ab ; Ab . Ab , . M x E

. H, ; , b . W , , x . T , .

B (1974: 179) b b , b b-, , , .M B . H b , . (M 1969: 28) S, B . H

, ; , . A - . (1982: 30) M (1982: 3) , : (1982: 54), b b . M b , b , x - b , . (1982: 54)[E ] Gbb (1994: 384)

. I PC M (1969: 232-233) , . I , PC : ; , : b / . (K 2001: 160)

analysing irony for translation


4/18

3 Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

2.1. Irony in pragmatic studies

I x . A (2000: 814) b G (1975) (CP) (S CP 3). H x CP b x b . (2000: 815) T x b b . Sb W (1995: 239) b , , b . T b (1995:passim) , .., , b PC.

Gbb (1994: 362) b q b [b ] b bj b , b b . H b G (1975) x x . Gbb, A Sb W , , - b[] , b q . (Sb W 1995: 249)

H (1995) b b - , ( S (2004) b) / , x x . (1995:11) T b (1995: passim) x , x b [ ] x . (1995: 91) T x

, , b - x , , q , - . (1995: 153) H b b b b, (1995: 154) b G(1975) x. S b meta-ironic function, x . (1995: 154) [E ] I,H , , x b b. (1995: 154) S b, ,


5/18

(1995: 154), bb , - z .(1995: 154-155) C x ,

H - b : 1) PC b , .., x , . I , b (1995: 156), 2) b x . T PC b x .

2.2. Irony in satire

S b x b B (2004: 112), b (2004: 156-57). H , , b . (2004:112). S, , b , (2004: 91) (2004: 43) (. -

b) T H (1995) q - x j b j. (2004: 43) [E ] F F, S ,(2004: 83) j : , ; , (2004:passim); x , (2004:passim), . T

b , b (2004: 66) - . S x x- x (2004: 89-90), f (2004: 103), q (2004: 141 145), x- (2004: 142), b [] x (2005: 166).

T , x , ,

j(2004: 216) x Private Eye, B z, x, . S - :

analysing irony for translation 5


6/18

3 Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

(2004: 158), G (1975) H (1994) q, , , - , . (S 2004: 163) T

q b b , (2004: 175) - . (2004: 176) P bH (1994) , , , / (.., C D 1969; H 1977). O ( b), b q (S 2004:189), - (b ) ( ).

S x

(2004: 211, 215 219) . A , - b b q (2004: 53), x , b b bj .(2004: 52-53) [E ] S q - b - q-, ,

b . (2004: 219) T - S q.

F , b , H(1995) S (2004) , PC (.., bj ), , , b .

M (.., : , , ,

, ), (, x : x, , x). T , x ( 2 b). O , (D, 1982).T PC.

2.3. Te contribution of literary analysis to the notion of irony

, I j b , , B (1974) M (1969, 1982). B : b b; :


7/18

(1974: 235). Sb : q- b .(1974: 233) Ub , , b b . (1974: 240) B

b M , b . (M 1969:120) T : (M 1969) b .

S B b : , , jx b; x, , j; ; ; b .

M (1982) b : bb

. I , bb b b . M (1969) : ,-, ingnu () z, . I : b; b ; ( ); ; q; b; ; ; b; - ; .

Ab E . H, Ab A-Jz Ib -Mq . M (1986) b b A-Jz : b, b, x, . A-Jz : ingnu .

V Ab , , . F x, Gb K Gb , ,

, , q . T S - M A-M , x.

I Ab b b M (1969, 1982) B (1974) , b , , b b- .

, b b: 1) ;

2) x . T b b b b . T B (1952) x b , q H



8/18

3 Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

; (1995: 159) 3) x .

F, b , b : , ,

, , , . N, x-/-b- , , . , ipso acto, x, x ( b) , x , () , ( ) x.T, - b - PC ( ) x

x , x ( -b b -) b q.

3. A multi-disciplinary approach to ironic inferencing throughstylistic manipulation

(1981) b

b - b b .B , W (1975) - , , - . W - .

G , , , , , b

, . S C (1975:13) , - q, b .

P ( ) , E (1964) x , , q x (H 1989; H M 1990; S 1989) (N 1990: 146-149). V

-: , .H (1994) b

. T x ; x


9/18

. T ; - , x . T x x , x, x.

L H (1994) Ab : / zz, :

Example 1

Literal translation: Te West has deaened our ears and made us dizzy by its abundanttalk about democracies

T b / zz : b

, , . I x b , x b , . W Ab , E , b (. ) . W , , W , , , , W . T, / zz W , , . S, x. T,

b b .

T x , . B x Ab M , , W , b x / zz - b, b b W j bj

, .., W, b .T x . T , H (1994) , / zz , j b (H M 1990) . F, q/ b

/ zz x x x .

W , , x b j , -

PC:



10/18

0 Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

Figure 1

Tree dimensional discourse function

SIUAIONAL DISCURSIVE FUNCION CONEXF = , x , =

= , , = M = x =

H, x / zz b b , .

F (1981) A (1975) x . I b x, , .., q b (. G x b),

q/ : / zz . I F , b I W b , b W . T b x - x j W .

I F (1981), : 1) - E (1964) x . B x

x x , , , , x, -, . 2) A x , , , - x, , , . I , b x x, x, -, . D, F (1981: 88), x , b b , ,

, with the consequences of this route for our perception of illocutionarystructure. [M ] B , : / S R Ab x:

Example 2

Literal translation: Te West made every efort it has, through its press, its broadcastings,its ambassadors and ministers, to talk, deend, communicate and argue in deence o thepoor Salman Rushdie, who is threatened by the barbaric and backward Muslims, justbecause he wrote a book in which he expresses his opinion!!


11/18

A , x, (F 1981) j , b , b . H, -, b x (

: bb M - b ). F, , W , R b . x, x q: 1) ( ) (M) b b W b x; 2) , x b W b (x 1 b ). T x/ x , ,

R W R I.

3.1. Contribution of speech acts theory and cooperative principleto the interpretation of irony

A b - , b x b, S (.., b ), ,

, b. C (1985), , b - , . (1985: 30) A , q, C, x j - (1985: 30). H G (1975) x b .

W - , -

b (C 1985) . I PC, , , b, b -b . T ,

prima acie, . C(1985: 44) b , , , b x.H , f b , , () b , , /

x, , x ( Gbb 1994: 379).T , , b

bj, b, , b (C



12/18

Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

1985). S b , , b , S C(1975) - b b . H,

(1975: 29) [ ] b . C(1985) x -. T , , b [/] . (1985: 132)

S C (1975) b x/. H, b , , , ,

b, b b, b b -b .

T b q. H ? P , , , ? F x, Ab x

/ N , :

Example

Literal translation: It seems that Mr MorgansNapoleonic information is at the level ohis mines, that is, below the ground

1) x b , 2) , 3) , , x (H M 1990: 98-99). T q: N , b x. H, - . T Ab , ,

, , (. H (1995) ) . T , , b, x b, ( ) : / -, Ab, / ; / b, .S, j N, -, , ( ) ( bj ) (. Sb W (1995) .L , b . T q b b b.

T b- x / - b:


13/18

Figure 2

Bi-directional text production/inferencing

W>I (, ) > b >

< b < R

G (1975) / , x /-. T , b b . G x b , b , (.., Sb W 1995; A 2000;H M 1990, 1997; K 2001; H 1995).

T - G (1975) b x, :

q ( q ); q ( b ); (x b , -b, b ); ( bj ).

A , ipso acto x , , E , b -b , , .

3.2. Te utility of Grices cooperative principle to the translation of irony

G (1975) x b . F C (1985: 31), x b , f . G b , b b x . H, . B , , , b . W : ,, ., x b ( ), -, x, j. M, b x : x, x - , , - , , b , -

, ( H [1995:18] x), .

T x G (1975) x



14/18

Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

b x . I , b b x- . M (1996; 1982) B (1974) G (1975)

b, . x :

Example 4

Still, if nothing else, these extra challenges* should raise Faheys prole.

[* Ex b RC b , , F H M H .]

T x b , .., b - b:

WHEN you are in trouble, one o the golden rules o politics is to call or a report. It isan almost ail-sae way o deusing an issue. Te only exception to this rule is when youare in deep, deep, deep trouble, in which case never call or a report because it may revealthe truth.

T x 4 x q, - : F [P ] b H , , , P G,b, , b F .

T x .T , , x , (, .), , x (H M 1990: 48): , x, x, .

T x 4 , . T

b . T b x . I, b x x . T - , : F jb , b !

A Ab b :

Back-translation: And what adds insult to injury is that all o these extra challengesthat Fahey will be charged with, will raise his popularity [literally: shares].

T b E x x, - q Ab. T b, , x b Ab x x


15/18

. T x x- , - . O b , .., / b

B x , , x x b q .

Example 5

Collins* is an expert, in fact the champion, o avoiding trouble in the GreinerGovernment.Mud?He doesnt even know what it is, and i he did, hes had itdry-cleanedbeore anybody else saw it.*[a ormer minister in the State o New South Wales, Australia]

T b : 1) x : /x b, b --; 2) ?: / , b q ; 3) x- b j -. T x - x : b, x bq j b. T x q .M , b - q . A, q M?

b x x b x - , . T q : b b - q , , b : [C]? x, M - b, , x. T x x x q. T b - - , , x .

C b Ab q b j.F x/ , x b , E. S, - j b b , b b b q b b . T

b Ab. M - b , .., / [: ], , x, -( Ab) . T b b x /



16/18


17/18


18/18

Meta, LIV, 1, 2009

Hutcheon, L. (1995): Ironys Edge: Te Teory and Politics o Irony, L N Y,R.

Kaueld, F. J. (2001): A, , G -, Eniko, N. (.), Cognition in Language Use: SelectedPapers rom the 7th International PragmaticsConerence 1, . 149-163.

Mruwwah, H. (1986): urathuna kaya nariuhu, B, -b -b.Muecke, D. C. (1969): Te Compass o Irony, L, M.Muecke, D. C. (1982): Irony and the Ironist, L, M.Muir, F. (1990): Te Oxord Book o Humorous Prose, From William Caxton to P.G. Wodehouse,

Ox, Ox U P.Newmark, P. (1988):A extbook o ranslation, UK, P H I.Nida, E. A. (1964): oward a Science o ranslating: With Special Reerence to Principles and

Procedures Involved in Bible ranslating, L, E. J. B.Nida, E. A. (1975): Exploring Semantic Structures, M, F.Nida, E. A. (1990): T b , Babel36-3, . 143-154.

Nord, C. (1994) , Dollerup,C. A. Lindegaard (), eaching ranslation and Interpreting 2: Insights, Aims,Visions, Second Language International Conerence (E, J 4-6,1993), A/P, Bj.

Saadeddin, M. A. (1989): x Ab-E ,AppliedLinguistics 10-1, . 36-51.

Searle, J. R. (1969): Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy o Language, L, CbU P.

Simpson, P. (2004): On the Discourse o Satire: owards a Stylistic Model o Satiric Humour,A/P, J Bj.

Sinclair, J. McH M. Coulthard (1975): owards an Analysis o Discourse: Te English

Used by eachers and Pupils, L, Ox U P.Sperer, D. D. Wilson (1995): Relevance: Communication and Cognition, Ox/

Cb, M, B.aylor, . J. (1981): Linguistic Teory and Structural Stylistics, Ox/N Y, P

P.Widdowson, H. G. (1975): Stylistics and the eaching o Literature, H, E, L.

Documents

Analysing Irony for Translation