Peter Newmar Final Summery

7/24/2019 Peter Newmar Final Summery

1/7

PETER NEWMARK


2/7

Peter Newmark developed translation theory in striking and sometimes

controversial ways, describing the conversion o a te!t rom one lang"age to another

as both a science and an art #e developed translation theory in striking and

sometimes controversial ways, describing the conversion o a te!t rom one lang"age

to another as both a science and an art$

#e deines translation as a way o rendering the meaning o a te!t into another

lang"age in the way that the a"thor intended the te!t$ Translation is an instr"ment o

ed"cation as well as o tr"th precisely beca"se it has to reach readers whose

c"lt"ral and ed"cational level is dierent rom, and oten %lower% or earlier, than, that

o the readers o the original $

#e says that & translation theory is concerned with the translation method

appropriately "sed or a certain type o te!t, and it is thereore dependent on a

"nctional theory o lang"age$ #owever, in a wider sense, translation theory is the

body o knowledge that we have abo"t translating, e!tending rom general principlesto g"idelines, s"ggestions and hints $ 't is concerned with min"tiae (the meanings o

semi)colons, italics, misprints* as well as generalities (presentation, the thread o

tho"ght "nderlying a piece*, and both may be e+"ally important in the conte!t$

Translation theory is pointless and sterile i it does not arise rom the problems o

translation practice, rom the need to stand back and relect, to consider all the

actors, within the te!t and o"tside it, beore coming to a decisin$-

't is important to know.

T#E 'NTENT'/N /0 T#E TE1T

T#E 'NTENT'/N /0 T#E TRAN23AT/R

TE1T 2T43E2. 0ollowing Nida, we disting"ish o"r types o (literary or

non)literary* te!t.

Narrative. a dynamic se+"ence o events

5escription. which is static, with emphasis on linking verbs, ad6ectives,

ad6ectival no"ns$

5ialog"e, with emphasis on collo+"ialisms and phaticisms$

2ETT'N7 .4o" have to make several ass"mptions abo"t the 23

3eadership$ $ The three typical reader types are perhaps the e!pert, the ed"catedlayman, and the "ninormed$


3/7

T#E 89A3'T4 /0 T#E WR'T'N7. ' the te!t is well written, i, e$ the

manner is as important as the matter, the right words arc in the right places, with a

minim"m o red"ndancy, yo" have to regard every n"ance o the a"thor%s

meaning (partic"larly i it is s"btle and diic"lt* as having precedence over the

reader%s response ) ass"ming they are not re+"ired to act or react promptly: on the

contrary, ass"ming hope"lly that they will read yo"r translation at least twice $

;/NN/TAT'/N2 AN5 5EN/TAT'/N2 . in a non)literary te!t the

denotations o a word normally come beore its connotations$


4/7

e!pressive, the inormative ) he called it %representation% ) and the vocative

(%appeal%* "nctions.

T#E E1PRE22'BE 09N;T'/N.The core o the e!pressive "nction is

the mind o the speaker, the writer, the originator o the "tterance$ #e "ses

the "tterance to e!press his eelings irrespective o any response$ 'N0/RMAT'BE 09N;T'/N . The core o the inormative "nction o

lang"age is e!ternal sit"ation, the acts o a topic, reality o"tside lang"age,

incl"ding reported ideas or theories$

T#E B/;AT'BE 09N;T'/N. The core o the vocative "nction o lang"age

is the readership, the addressee$ The irst actor in all vocative te!ts is the

relationship between the writer and the readership, which is realised in

vario"s types o socially or personally determined grammatical relations

or orms o address$ The second actor is that these te!ts m"st be written in

a lang"age that is immediately comprehensible to the readership$

T#E AE2T#ET'; 09N;T'/N. This is lang"age designed to please thesenses, irstly thro"gh its act"al or imagined so"nd, and secondly thro"gh its

metaphors$

T#E P#AT'; 09N;T'/N. The phatic "nction o lang"age is "sed or

maintaining riendly contact with the addressee rather than or imparting

oreign inormation$

T#E META3'N79A3 09N;T'/N. 3astly, the metaling"al "nction o

lang"age indicates a lang"age%s ability to e!plain, name, and criticise its own

eat"res$


5/7

0inally, Newmark en"merates the dierent translation methods$ They are.

Word-for-word translation. The 23 word)order is preserved and the words

translated singly by their most common meanings, o"t o conte!t$ ;"lt"ral

words are translated literally$

Literal translation.The 23 grammatical constr"ctions are converted to

their nearest T3 e+"ivalents b"t the le!ical words are again translated

singly, o"t o conte!t$ Faithful translation. A aith"l Translation attempts to reprod"ce the precise

conte!t"al meaning o the original within the constraints o the T3

grammatical str"ct"res$

Semantic translation.2emantic translation diers rom %aith"l translation%

only in as ar as it m"st take more acco"nt o the aesthetic val"e$

Adaptation:This is the %reest% orm o translation$

Free translation. 't reprod"ces the matter witho"t the manner, or the content

witho"t the orm o the original$

Idiomatic translation.'diomatic translation reprod"ces the %message% o

the original b"t tends to distort n"ances o meaning by preerringcollo+"ialisms and idioms where these do not e!ist in the original$


6/7

Communicative translation. 't attempts to render the e!act conte!t"al

meaning o the original in s"ch a wav that both content and lang"age

are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the 3eadership$

Newmark considers that only semantic and comm"nicative translation "lil

the two main aims o translation, which are irst, acc"racy, and second, economy$2emantic translation is "sed or %e!pressive% te!ts, comm"nicative or %inormative% and

%vocative% te!ts$


7/7

2o"rces.

A Textbook of Translation,

Wikipedia

Documents

Peter Newmar Final Summery