application of eugene nida’s model of translation on ...tspmt.com/july2015_issue_part_1/7.wajid...

ASIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY Vol. 5 (2), July 2015: 46-58 ISSN (Print): 2249-7374

Website: http://www.tspmt.com ISSN (Online): 2347-4947 RESEARCH ARTICLE

Application of Eugene Nida’s Model of Translation on George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Translated by Allau-Ud-Din

Wajid Riaz1, Abdul Bari Khan, Farhat Tanzin, Noureen Aslam, Ghazala Yasmeen and Tasadduq Hussain

Department of Linguistics & Literature, University of Lahore, Sargodha Campus, Pakistan.

1Email: [email protected]

Received: 17th April 2015, Revised: 21st May 2015, Accepted: 30th May 2015

ABSTRACT The present paper is about the applications Of Eugene Nida’s model of translation On George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) Translated by Allau-Ud-Din which attempts to seek the analysis of translated paragraph either fulfills the dynamic equivalence model (1964) of Eugene Nida or the translation made by Allau-Ud-Din follow other model. However, other models are being touched to make the analysis for incorporating applications for translation such as Vinay and Darbelnet's model (1995), Catford’s model (1965), Katherine Reiss’ model (1977), action model introduced by Holz-Manttari (1984), SKOPOS’ model introduced by Hans.J.Vrmeer (1989) and House’s model of translation (1994). However, the four basic requirements of translation given by Nida are observed in the entire novel. Alongwith these issues, the cultural difference is also worth noticing in the Urdu translation of source text as it recognizes the role of translator to take optional shifts in translation can be attributed to the difference between the original writer and the translator as two text produces. As we already know English and Urdu languages have different grammatical structures so translator employs the technique of structural shift. In which Allau-Ud-Din changes the grammatical structure of source text according to target text to make the accurate translation. Therefore, the analysis of this paper seeks to investigate the application of Eugene Nida’s model of translation based on Equivalence, Translational shift approaches, Functional theories of translation and Discourse and Register analytical models, on George Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) translation made by Allau-Ud-Din. Key words: Translation, Eugene Nida’s Model, Animal Farm INTRODUCTION Both foreign and domestic scholars have made an attempt to offer a definition of translation based on their study. A few important definitions are stated as follows. “Translation is a skill in which the merit of the original work is so completely transferred into another language, as to be as distinctly apprehended, and as strongly felt, by a native of the country to which that language belongs, as it is by those who speak the language of original work.” (Tytler 1791) “Translation is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in the way that the author intended the text.” (Newmark 1988). In relation to communication, translation has also been helpful in transmitting cultures and languages have been in touch with each other. In the nineteen century, European culture was drawing heavily on Latin and Greek, and German culture was absorbing Shakespeare. Since last century, an organization of world literature has appeared, consisting of the works of a number of ‘international’ writers, which are translated into most national languages. People of different cultures are also open to the elements of author’s notions and history. Moreover, translation has considered as a tool for learning foreign languages. It is still popular due to its value in class despite the fact that the grammar-translation teaching method seems to be almost extinct. According to Eugene Nida (1964), the objectives of the translation techniques are as follows: 1. To allow adjustment of the form of the message to the requirements of the structure

of the target language. 2. To produce semantically equivalent structures.

Riaz Vol. 5 (2): 2015 Asian J. Edu. Res. & Tech.

~ 47 ~

3. To provide equivalent stylistic appropriateness. 4. To carry an equivalent communicative purpose. To attain these four objectives, a translator must make various negligible alterations in form which are generalized and classified by Eugene Nida (1964, 227-233) as embellishments appropriateness and alterations. Thus the purpose of our analysis is: 1. To investigate the status of target text. 2. To check the position of translator whether enjoyed or not. 3. To analyse whether translation in target text is adequate or not. So, the translation of George Orwell’s novel ANIMAL FARM by Alla-ud- Deen is being analysed under the models of Equivalence, Translational shift approaches, Functional theories of translation and Discourse and Register analytical models. Research Questions: 1. Whether Nida’s model of translation on George Orwell’s Animal Farm translation

made by Allau-Ud-Din is an appropriate model or other models are applicable to Allau-Ud-Din’s translation?

2. What applications can be incorporated from George Orwell’s Animal Farm translated made by Allau-Ud-Din through Nida’s model?

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY The objectives of the paper are given below: 1. Investigate the application of Eugene Nida’s model of on George Orwell’s

Animal Farm (1945) translation made by Allau-Ud-Din. 2. To discuss Nida’s model of translation based on Equivalence, Translational shift

approaches, Functional theories of translation and Discourse and Register analytical models.

3. To discuss different models for translation for the better understanding of translation made from the target text.

METHODOLOGY The research is purely qualitative seeks the applications of Nida’s translation model. Different models are discussed randomly to apply on George Orwell’s Animal Farm translated by Allau-Ud-Din for incorporating applications for the better understanding of translation. LITERATURE REVIEW Roman Jakobson (2000) describes three kinds of translation intrangulal, interlingual and intersemiotic. According to the Jakobson (2000) interlingual refers to translation between two different written languages. He deals with linguistic meaning and equivalence. For Jakobson, cross-linguistic differences centre on obligatory grammatical and lexical forms: “Languages differ in what they must convey and not in what they may convey. Differences occur at: level of gender, aspect and semantic fields”. According to Nida (1964), meaning is broken down into linguistic, referential and emotive meaning. In Chomsky (1964)’s Generative-transformational model, sentences have been analyzed into a series of related levels. The key features are as followed: 1. Phrase-structure rules generate an underlying or deep structure which is 2. Transformed by transformational rules relating one underlying structure to another,

to produce 3. A final surface structure, which itself is subject to phonological and morphemic rules. According to Chomsky (1964)’s Model Kernal Sentences are the basic of such structure which are simple, active, declarative sentences; and these are to be obtained from the ST surface structure by process of backformation. Four types of functional class of Generative-transformational grammar are involved: events, objects, abstracts and relational. Newmark (1981) feels that the success of equivalent effect is ‘illusory’ and ‘the conflict of loyalties, the gap between emphasis on source and target language will always


~ 48 ~

remain the problem in translation theory and practice’. He suggests narrowing the gap by replacing the old terms with those of ‘semantie’ and ‘communicative’ translation. He indicates that semantic translation differs from literal translation; it represents context’, interprets and even explains while literal translation means word-for-word in its extreme version and in its weaker form, sticks very closely to ST Lexis and Syntax. Vinay and Darbelnet (1995) had identified two general translation strategies that are: direct and oblique translation. These strategies have seven procedures: borrowing, colque, and literal translation covered by direct translation. Transposition (obligatory, optional), Modulation (obligatory, optional), Equivalence and Adaptation. Catford (1965), in his ‘A Linguistic Theory of Translation’ analyzes language as communication operating functionally in context on a range of different levels and ranks. Catford (1965) makes an important distinction between format correspondence and textual equivalence. He considers two kinds of shifts: 1. A level shift (one language and lexis into another). 2. Category shift subdivided into four kinds:

a. Structural shifts (shift in grammatical structure). b. Class shifts (shift from one part of speech to another). c. Unit-shifts or rank shifts. d. Intra-system shifts.

Katherina Reiss (1977)’s work is based upon the concept of equivalence. She has had emphasized on the text on level at which communication is achieved and equivalence must be sought. In her viewpoint, there are four main characteristics of each text type: operative, audiomedial, informative, expressive text. Holz Manttari (1984) in his translational action model describes interlingual translation as purpose-driven, outcome of oriented human interaction and focuses on the process of translation as message transmitter compounds involving intercultural transfer (p. 17, Quoated in Nord 1997, p, 13). He had described interlingual translation as translational action from a source text involving a series of roles and players that are as followed: the TT producer, the TT user and the TT receiver. In Skopos theory (1970) which was developed in Germany, the main focus has been given on what is the type of TT being produced. According to skopos theory, to know why a ST is to be translated means what is the purpose or aim of translating ST and what would be the functional of the TT. In Skopos theory, more focus has been given on interlinguistic and intralinguistics. ST has not given more importance than that of TT. The purpose has to be written very explicitly and it allows the possibility of the same text being translated in different ways according to the purpose of TT. Christina Nord (1997)’s list of intralinguistc factors that are of particular relevance in the analysis of ST is comprised of these elements named non verbal elements, the register of the lexis and presuppositions. Hallidayan model (1994) of discourse analysis is based upon synthetic functional grammer associated to study of language as communication and finding meaning in the writer’s linguistic choices and systematically relating those choices to a sociolingual framework. The House’s model of translation quality assessment is based on Hallidayan model (1994) of language and discourse. The model involves a systematic comparison of the textual profile of the ST and TT and it draws on various and sometimes complex texonomies. 1. A profile is produced of the ST register. 2. This is added a description of the ST genre realized by register. 3. This allows a statement of function to be made for the ST. 4. Some descriptive process is then carried but for the TT. 5. The TT profile is compared to the ST profile. 6. Then a statement of quality is made of translation. 7. Finally translation can be categorized into one of two types: overt or covert

translation. In this analysis, some of the characteristics of these models are applied and described with examples from ST and TT.


~ 49 ~

INTRODUCTION OF THE WRITER George Orwell was born Eric Arthur Blair. The son of a civil servant, he was born in India in 1903. Orwell served with the Indian Imperial Police in Burma from 1922 to 1927. In 1936, he fought for the Republicans in the Spanish civil war and was wounded. He was admitted to a sanitorium in 1938. During World War II, Orwell served in the British Home Guard and subsequently (from 1941 to 1943), worked for the BBC Eastern Service. He was the literary editor of the Tribune and contributed to the Observer and the Manchester Evening News. George Orwell is most famous for his book, “Animal Farm”, published in 1945 and republished in 1949. He died in London in January of 1950. ABOUT THE BOOK Written as a "fairy story”, Orwell titled the book "Animal Farm: A Fairy Story". The subject of Animal Farm is very much aimed at an adult audience. Orwell wrote it as a parable about the Russian Revolution, as an example of how a revolutionary government could be worse than its monarchist predecessor, but it also could apply to many political organizations, labor unions, and the like. Orwell paints a vivid picture of a violent political revolution of farm animals against the farmer who owns all, makes to work the animal population hard, sends their offsprings to slaughter and feeds them little. Orwell describes a corruption that undermines the goal of the revolution in which the leaders can assume the role of master and oppress the masses. The characters in Animal Farm were inspired by the Russian Revolution and the events that followed. The pig Napoleon is clearly the farm's Josef Stalin, but Animal Farm was not simply a satire on the Russian Revolution. Orwell's message was intended to be broader. INTRODUCTION OF THE TARGET TEXT The famous novel “Animal Farm” written by George Orwell is translated in Urdu by Syed Alla-ud-Din. He has critically observed each and every aspect of the novel. Alla-ud-Din uses all his abilities in writing the translation of the novel and makes it perfectly good and attractive for the readers. Like original text, this translated text gains much popularity among the readers. The title of the novel remains the same. He does not include anything in the translated version of the novel. He works very hard to make the novel successful. SUMMARY OF THE SOURCE TEXT The story takes place on a farm somewhere in England. The action of this novel starts when the oldest pig on the farm, Old Major calls all animals to a secret meeting where he compares the humans to parasites and teaches the animals a revolutionary song, "Beasts of England". He tells them about his dream of a revolution against the cruel Mr. Jones. Three days later, Major dies, but the speech gives the more intelligent animals a new outlook to life. The pigs who are considered the most intelligent animals instruct the other ones. During the period of preparation two pigs distinguish themselves, Napoleon and Snowball. Although Napoleon is big yet he isn't a good speaker. Snowball is a better speaker. He has a lot of ideas and his ideas are very vivid. Together with another pig called Squealer who is a very good speaker, they work out on the theory of "Animalism". The rebellion starts some months later when Mr. Jones comes home drunk one night and forgets to feed the animals. They break out of the barns and run to the house where the food is stored. When Mr. Jones sees this, he takes out his shotgun but it is too late. All the animals fall over him and drive him off the farm. The animals destroy all whips, nose rings, reins and all other instruments that have been used to suppress them. On the same day, the animals celebrate their victory with an extra ration of food. The pigs constitute the seven commandments, and they write them above the door of the big barn. They run thus: 1. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. 2. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings is a friend. 3. No animal shall wear clothes.


~ 50 ~

4. No animal shall sleep in a bed. 5. No animal shall drink alcohol. 6. No animal shall kill another animal. 7. All animals are equal. The animals also agree that no animal shall ever enter the farmhouse and that no animal shall have contact with humans. These commandments are summarized in the simple phrase: "Four legs good, two legs bad". After some time, Jones comes back with some other men from the village to recapture the farm. The animals fight bravely they manage to defend the farm. Snowball and Boxer receive medals of honour for defending the farm so bravely. Also Napoleon, who had not fought at all, takes a medal. This is the reason why the two pigs, Snowball and Napoleon, often argue. When Snowball presents his idea to build a windmill, to produce electricity for the other animals, Napoleon calls nine strong dogs. The dogs drive Snowball from the farm, and Napoleon explains that Snowball was in fact co-operating with Mr. Jones. Using a young pig named Squealer as a mouthpiece; Napoleon announces that Snowball stole the idea for the windmill from him. He also explains that Snowball in reality never had a medal of honour that Snowball was always trying to cover up that he was fighting on the side of Mr. Jones. The animals then start building the windmill, and as time passes the working-time goes up, whereas the food rations decline. Although the "common" animals have not enough food, the pigs grow fatter and fatter. They tell the other animals that they need more food, for they are managing the whole farm. Some time later, the pigs explain to the other animals that they have to trade with the neighbouring farms. The common animals are very upset, because since the revolution there has been a resolution that no animal shall trade with a human. But the pigs ensure them that there never has been such a resolution, and that this was an evil lie of Snowball. Shortly after this decision the pigs move to the farmhouse. The other animals remember that there is a commandment that forbids sleeping in beds, and so they go to the big barn to look at the commandments. When they arrive there they can't believe their eyes, the fourth commandment has been changed to: "No animal shall sleep in bed with sheets". And the other commandments have also been changed: "No animal shall kill another animal without reason", and "No animal shall drink alcohol in excess". Eventually the laws are replaced with "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others", and "Four legs good, two legs better!" as the pigs become more human. Some months later a heavy storm destroys the windmill, which is nearly finished. Napoleon accuses Snowball of destroying the mill, and he promises a reward to the animal that gets Snowball. The rebuilding of the mill takes place within two years. Again Jones attacks the farm, and although the animals defend it, the windmill is once again destroyed. The pigs decide to rebuild the mill again, and they cut down the food rations to a minimum. One day Boxer breaks down. He is sold to a butcher, but Napoleon tells the pigs that Boxer has been brought to a hospital where he has died. Three years later, the mill is finally completed. During this time Napoleon deepens the relations with the neighbouring farm, and one day Napoleon even invites the owners of this farm for an inspection. They sit inside the farmhouse and celebrate the efficiency of his farm, where the animals work very hard with a minimum food. During this celebration, all the other animals meet at the window of the farm, and when they look inside they can't distinguish between man and animal. ANALYSIS OF TRANSLATION (ANIMAL FARM) EQUIVALENCE AND EQUIVALENT EFFECT Eugene Nida has been a pioneer in the field of translation and linguistics. His most notable contribution to translation theory is Dynamic Equivalence (1964), also known as Functional Equivalence. Nida (1964) describes various “scientific approaches to meaning” related to work that had been carried out by theorists in semantic and pragmatics. Central to Nida (1964)’s work is the move away from the old idea that an orthographic word has a


~ 51 ~

fixed meaning and towards a functional definition of meaning in which a word acquires meaning through its context and can produce varying responses according to culture. Meaning is broken into linguistic meaning, referential meaning and emotive meaning. Nida (1964) has also talked about semantic structure analysis in which he has separated out visually the different meaning of words according to their characteristics. The central idea of this analysis is to encourage the trainee translator to realize that the sense of a complex semantic term such as spirit or the word bachelor varies and most particularly is ‘conditional’ by its context. He is of the view that connotative and emotive values varies according to the target culture. Above all, Nida (1964) stresses the importance of context for communication when dealing with metaphorical meaning and with complex cultural idioms. In general, techniques of componential analysis are proposed as a meaning of clarifying ambiguities, elucidating obscure passages and identifying cultural differences. They may serve as a point of comparison between different languages and cultures. Nida (1964) has given four basic requirements of a translation: 1. Making sense 2. Conveying the spirit and manner of original. 3. Having a natural and easy form of expression 4. Producing a similar response Nida's dynamic-equivalence theory (1964) is often held in opposition to the views of philologists who maintain that an understanding of the source text (ST) can be achieved by assessing the inter-animation of words on the page, and that meaning is self-contained within the text (i.e. much more focused on achieving semantic equivalence). Nida (1964) begins by asserting that, “No two languages are identical, either in the meanings given to corresponding symbols or in the ways in which symbols are arranged in phrases and sentences. It stands to reason that there can be no absolute correspondence between languages. Hence, there can be no fully exact translations.” While the impact of a translation may be close to the original, there can be no identity in detail. Nida (1964) brings in the reminder that while there are no such things as “identical equivalents” in translating, what one must in translating seek to do is to find the “closest possible equivalent”. Here he identifies two basic orientations in translating based on two different types of equivalence: Formal Equivalence (F-E) and Dynamic Equivalence (D-E).F-E focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content. Such translations then would be concerned with such correspondences as poetry to poetry, sentence to sentence, and concept to concept. Such a formal orientation that typifies this type of structural equivalence is called a “gloss translation” in which the translator aims at reproducing as literally and meaningfully as possible the form and content of the original. The principles governing an F-E translation would then be: reproduction of grammatical units; consistency in word usage; and meanings in terms of the source context. D-E on the other hand aims at complete “naturalness” of expression. D-E translation is directed primarily towards equivalence of response rather than equivalence of form. The relationship between the target language receptor and message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original (source language) receptors and the message. The principles governing a D-E translation then would be: conformance of a translation to the receptor language and culture as a whole; and the translation must be in accordance with the context of the message which involves the stylistic selection and arrangement of message constituents. The assigned task is to analyze the translation of George Orwell’s novel “Animal Farm” according to Nida’s model of translation (1976). After the close reading of the text and translation of Animal Farm it has been found that translation of this novel has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida which describes that translation of any text into another language is done by giving sense and keeping the spirit of source text intact into target text.


~ 52 ~

Some of the paragraphs from “Animal Farm” have been written below in source text i.e English and their translation in target text i.e Urdu are also mentioned below to analyze them according to Nida’s model of translation. MR. JONES, of the Manor Farm, had locked the hen-houses for the night, but was too drunk to remember to shut the popholes. With the ring of light from his lantern dancing from side to side, he lurched across the yard, kicked off his boots at the back door, drew himself a last glass of beer from the barrel in the scullery, and made his way up to bed, where Mrs. Jones was already snoring.

This paragraph has been taken from the first chapter of novel and it is the very first paragraph of the chapter. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The overall sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the previous lines. The close view of the translation unfolds the fact that some of the words have not been translated but even then the sense remains intact and there is no loss of identity as described by Nida. For example, there is no translation of the word “Manor Farm” in Urdu but reader does not find any lacking in translation. The word “Hen-houses” has been translated as “Mavashee Khana” which again is not the literal translation of hen-houses.but has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence. The word “Remember” has been translated as “Bhool Jana” which gives the complete sense though it is away from literal translation. Another example in this regard is the word “Ring” which has been translated as “dairah”. So it can be said that the translation of this paragraph shows that it falls under the concept of dynamic equivalence and basic requirements given by Nida. In translation verb has not necessarily been translated as verb and preposition has not strictly been translated as preposition. The rules of target language have been followed in the process of translation. In this chosen paragraph, the number of English words is 97 whereas in Urdu, it is 75 because sense and spirit has been applied in translation not the norms of source text have been followed. Three nights later old Major died peacefully in his sleep. His body was buried at the foot of the orchard.

This paragraph has been taken from the second chapter of novel and it is the very first paragraph of the chapter. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The over all sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the


~ 53 ~

previous lines. There is no translation of the word “Foot” in Urdu but reader does not find any lacking in translation. The word “Body” has been translated as “Jasde khaki” which again is not the literal translation of body .but has been translated according to the concept of dynamic equivalence. HOW they toiled and sweated to get the hay in! But their efforts were rewarded, for the harvest was an even bigger success than they had hoped.

The selected paragraph has been taken from the start of third chapter of novel. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The over all sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the previous lines. The close view of the translation unfolds the fact that some of the words have not been translated but even then the sense remains intact and there is no loss of identity as described by Nida. For example, there is no translation of the word “How” in Urdu but reader does not find any lacking in translation. The word “Hope” has been translated as “Sooch” which again is not the literal translation of hope but has been translated according to the concept of dynamic equivalence. Nevertheless, they were both thoroughly frightened by the rebellion on Animal Farm, and very anxious to prevent their own animals from learning too much about it. At first they pretended to laugh to scorn the idea of animals managing a farm for themselves.

This paragraph has been taken from the fourth chapter of novel and it is the third paragraph of the chapter. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The over all sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the previous lines. AS WINTER drew on, Mollie became more and more troublesome. She was late for work every morning and excused herself by saying that she had overslept, and she complained of mysterious pains, although her appetite was excellent. On every kind of pretext she would run away from work and go to the drinking pool, where she would stand foolishly gazing at her own reflection in the water. But there were also rumours of something more serious. One day, as Mollie strolled blithely into the yard, flirting her long tail and chewing at a stalk of hay, Clover took her aside.


~ 54 ~

This paragraph has been taken from the fifth chapter of novel and it is the very first paragraph of the chapter. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The over all sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the previous lines. This paragraph is also showing the gender biased attitude of the writer. Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

This paragraph has been taken from the tenth chapter of novel and it is the very last paragraph of the chapter. The translation of the paragraph is clearly showing that it has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence given by Eugene Nida. The over all sense has been given in Urdu translation by keeping the spirit and essence of Source Text intact into Target Text. There is no literal translation of the paragraph given by translator means that reader does not find Formal Equivalence. It has also been observed that easy form of expression is vivid in translation of the selected paragraph and the translated paragraph also produces the similar response as source text has produced. Hence, the translation fulfills the basic requirements described by Nida mentioned in the previous lines. THE TRANSLATION SHIFT APPROACH INTRODUCTION The emphasis of the structural approach to translation changes to words the end of the 1950s and early 1960s with the work of Vinay and Darbelnet (1995), and Catford (1965), and the concept of translation shift which examines the linguistic changes that take place in the translation between the ST and TT (Munday p.55). According to Venuti (1995) "Translation theories that privilege equivalence must inevitably come to terms with the existence of 'shift' between the foreign and translated texts". VINAY AND DARBELNET'S MODEL Vinay and Darbelnet (1995) carried out a comparative stylistic analysis of French and English. They looked at text in languages, noting differences between the languages and identifying different translation strategies and 'procedures'. They also identified two


~ 55 ~

translation strategies which are direct translation and oblique translation which are somewhat resemble the literal and free methods.The two strategies comprise procedures. APPLICATION OF VINAY AND DARBELNET'S MODEL ON "ANIMAL FARM" Borrowin The SL word is transferred directly to the TL. It is used in other languages to fill a semantic gap in the TL and to add local colour. Example ST: Animal farm, Commrade, Animal Committee, Retirement.

TT: , , , Calque Where the SL expression is literally transferred into the target language and often become fully integrated into TL, alongwith some times with some semantic changes Example 1 ST: All animals are equal.

TT: Example 2 ST: No animals shall wear clothes.

TT: Modulation This changes the semantic and point of view of the SL. Example ST:Beasts of England.

TT: Adaptation This involves changing the cultural references when the situation in the source culture does not exist in the target culture. Example ST: which was a Saturday,Mr.Jones went into Willingdon.

TT: , CATFORD AND TRANSLATION SHIFTS The term shift seems to originate by Catford (1965). He makes an important distinction between formal correspondence and textual equivalence. According to him a formal correspondent is any TL category which can be said to occupy as nearly as possible the same place in the economy of the TL as the given SL category occupy in the SL and a textual equivalent is any TL text or portion of text which is observed on a particular occasion to be the equivalent of a given SL text or portion of text. When the two concepts diverge a translation shift is deemed to have a occurred.In Catfords own words translation shifts are thus departures from formal correspondence in the process of going from the SL to the TL. APPLICATION OF CATFORD'S MODEL ON "ANIMAL FARM" Shift of level Where a lexeme is expressed by a grammatical concept. Example ST:The animals were underfed.

TT:


~ 56 ~

Structural shifts These are said by Catford (1965) to be the most common form of shift and involve mostly a shift in grammatical structure. Example Subject verb object �� ST: Mr. Jones feeds us.

TT: Unit shifts or rank shifts In this shifts longer sentences are broken into smaller sentences for ease of translation. Example ST: Beasts of every land and clime.

TT: FUNCTIONAL THEORIES KATHERINE REISS MODEL OF TEXT TYPOLOGY: In this model she classifies text types according to their functions and the establishment of the source text type as an important phase in translating process. Some of the characteristics of text type in Reiss model (1977) are found in George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’.The translator of this novel Syed Alla-ud-din has used ‘plain prose’with required explicitations.As in ST it is stated that : He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs….. These lines are translated in Urdu by Alla-ud-din as nearest to the original context of SL.As: Katherine Reiss (1977) emphasizes on source oriented text type, so the type of ‘Animal Farm’ is informative because it involves plain prose, it transmit referential content i.e, satire on Russion revolution, logically build content to entertain as well as to inform ST reader. Through close analysis of ‘we come to know that besides, its informative function it also serves as operative text for TT readers. Syed Alla-ud-din has adopted equivalent effect in content of translation so that TT reader may get an appellative interest. In this way we can say that text type of ‘ANIMAL FARM’ is informative as well as operative. TRANSLATIONAL ACTION MODEL: The translational action model proposed by Holz-Manttari (1984). According to her, interlingual translation is described as ‘translational action from a source text’ and as a communicative process involving a series of roles and players. The initiator:

We come to know that the translation of ‘Animal Farm’ is processed by City Book point (the publisher).They hired Syed Alla-ud-din for translation of this novel. In this way, they are initiator of this communicative process.

TT producer: Syed Alla-ud-din has translated ‘Animal Farm’ into ‘ Urdu’ which is ‘.So he is producer of this translation.

The receiver: It is mentioned in the ‘forward’ by Asif Hassan, the head of Initiator Company that their aim of translating this book is to provide rich variety of literary tastes to the TT reader.

SKOPOS MODEL: It is introduced by Hans. J. Vrmeer (1989) According to this model; A TT or translation is determined by its skopo (aim):


~ 57 ~

We analysed that the translation of ‘Animal Farm’ in Urdu by Syed Alla-ud-din is for the sake of business or sale. So in this way it is a sales literature.

A TT must be internally coherent: The translation is internally coherent. Every event is linked with next event revealing some information.

A TT must be coherent with ST: The translation has skillfully carried all semantic coherence with that of SL.The sequence of chapters is kept same as in ST to attain equivalent effect.

So the form and function of can be regarded as adequate to the skopos in TL. DISCOURSE AND REGISTER ANALYSIS HOUSE’S MODEL OF TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT According to the House’s model of translation (1994) quality assessment, translation can be categorized into one of the two types: ‘overt translation’ or ‘covert translation’. An ‘overt translation’ is a TT that does not purport to be an original. In House’s definition, ‘an overt translation is one in which the addressees of the translation text are quiet ‘overtly’ not been directly addressed’. Overt translation is tied to a particular source culture, time and historical context and with the translation of works of literature, which are tied to their source culture. A ‘covert translation’ is a translation which enjoys the status of an original source text in the target culture. The source text is not linked particularly to the ST culture or audience; both ST and TT address their respective receivers directly. The function of a covert translation is to recreate, reproduce or represent in the translated text the function the original has in its target culture. On the basis of House’s Model of translation quality assessment the translated text of Animal Farm may fall in the category of ‘Covert translation’. The translated text of Animal Farm enjoys the status of its source text. It is a literal kind of translation. Both of texts have same function and the translated text enjoys the same status as the original text has in its target culture. FINDINGS The findings of this assignment are based on the model of translation given by Eugene Nida (1964). Through the analysis of all translated paragraphs, it has been found that the complete translation of the novel has been done according to the concept of dynamic equivalence elaborated by Eugene Nida. Furthermore, four basic requirements of translation given by Nida have also been observed in the entire translation of novel .Alongwith these issues; the cultural difference is also worth noticing in the Urdu translation of source text. In this translation the role of the translator stands as the most recognizable factor. The majority of optional shifts taking place in translation can be attributed to the difference between the original writer and the translator as two text produces. In translation, the translator has applied different techniques in order to produce it as a live work. Thus shifts do not occur because translator does not wish to change the spirit of a work but he strives to reproduce it as faithfully as possible to grasp fully. The translator applies many techniques of shift approach in translation like borrowing, modulation, adaptation and shift of level. He used this technique to fill a semantic gap and to add local colour in it. By modulation we can judge the free status of translator as he has changed the meaning and point of view of source text. While applying the adaptation technique, the writer altered the cultural reference of ST according to the culture of TT to make it understandable for readers. The translator has applied the technique of shift of level in translation. In which a lexeme is conveyed by a grammatical concept. The example in this regards is a single word ''underfed'' that readers could understand it more clearly. As we already know English and Urdu languages have different grammatical structures so


~ 58 ~

translator employed the technique of structural shift. In which he has changed the grammatical structure of source text according to target text. For making the target language easier for the reader, the translator has broken down the longer sentences into smaller sentences by applying unit shifts. Thus using many techniques the translator enjoys is free status, while translating the SL into TL he has brought many changes for the ease of the readers. The models of functional theories are applied, so the form and function of ‘Animal Farm’ can be regarded as adequate to the Skopos in TL.The text is also informative as well as operative in terms of Reiss text typologies. While analyzing the translated text of Animal farm, from House’s Model of translation quality assessment, we found that it is a covert translation as it enjoys the status as being original as its source text. Both the source text and the target text address their receivers in a direct way. Even their functions and themes are same. It is a literal (word for word) kind of translation. The words chosen by the translator in Urdu language are as same as being used in the source text in English language. There is no difference between the situations being sketched by the author of the source text and the situations being presented by the translator in the text. Even if a reader reads both texts, he can clearly feel that he is reading a same text and same story but in two different languages (English and Urdu). The translated text enjoys the same status as of the Source text. CONCLUSION The findings of the assignment shows clearly that the process of translation of this novel has been closely analyzed and applied by following different models of translation. Although translation tells us the cultural differences alongwith the differences regarding the structure and pattern of two languages yet it maintains the sense and spirit of source text as well as target text. Two types of a text are analyzed, informative and operative. The aim is to enable the readers to develop their understanding regarding source text and target text. The effort has been made in applying the different models of translation in such a way that the reader may not only understand the different techniques of translation but also enjoy the beauty of source text as well as target text. REFRENCES

1. Alla-ud-di S. (2008): . Lahore: City Publisher. 2. Catford J. (1965): A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press. 3. Chomsky N. (1964): Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. Netherland: Mouton. CO & N.V. Publishers 4. Halliday M. (1994): An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn.), London, Edward Arnold. 5. Jakobson R. (2000): On linguistic aspects of translation, in: Laurence Venuti (ed.) The Translation Studies

Reader. London. New York: Routledge. 6. Munday Je. (2001): Introducing Translational Studies: Theories and Applications. London: Rutledge. 7. Newmark P. (1988): A Textbook of Translation. United Kingdom: Prentice Hall International 8. Newmark P. (1981): Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. 9. Nida E. and Reybum W. (1981): Meaning across Cultures. New York: Orbis Books. 10. Nida E. and Taber C. (1969): The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 11. Nida E. (1964): Toward a Science of Translating. Leiden. E.J. Brill, pp. 1-2. 12. Nida E. (1964): Toward A Science of Translation. Netherlands: Leiden. 13. Nida E. (1976): “A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation". In R.W. Brislin.

(ed). Translation: Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press, pp. 47-79. 14. Nord C. (1997): Translation as a Purposeful Activity. Manchester: St Jerome. 15. Orwell G. (1945): ANIMAL FARM. United Kingdom: Penguin. 16. Reiss K. (1977): Text-types, Translation Types and Translation Assessment. Finland: Oy Finn Lectura. Ab. 17. Reiss K. (2000): Type, Kind and Individuality of Text: Decision Making in Translation. 1971. Translation

Studies Reader. (2nd Edition). L. Venuti. New York: Routledge. Pp. 168-179. 18. Tytler F. (1791): Essay on the Principles of Translation. (1978 edn). France: Jan Benjamin. 19. Venuti L. (1995): The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation. London: Routledge. 20. Vermeer H. (1989): “Skopos and Commission in Translational Action”, in: Andrew Chesterman (ed.),

Readings in Translation Theory. Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura Ab, 173–87. 21. Vinay J. and Darbelnet J. (1995): Comparative Stylistics of French and English: a Methodology for

Translation. (J. C. Sager and M. J. Hamel, Trans.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

application of eugene nida’s model of translation on ...tspmt.com/july2015_issue_part_1/7.wajid...

Documents