The textual and pragmatic components of the translation model

The text should show two types of structural and cohesive relationships: local and global, so that it can be described. The first can be explained by the “grammar of the sentence”, which has already been sufficiently discussed in the previous material. The second kind includes relations that cannot be taken into account “without reference to the functions of the mutual offer and part of the text outside the proposal in question”. Consequently, the study of such a component would inevitably presuppose confidence in textual linguistics. In fact, combining this linguistic approach is an essential procedural condition for macro-level analysis. In other words, the analysis cannot be performed in arbitrary order on the selected sentences, not taking into account that these sentences should show the property of global connectivity in addition to their local cohesion. This particular requirement is met by inserting a text component into the macro-level analysis. The analysis in this component will focus on the elements in the individual sentences, which, in addition to playing a role in the structure of the sentence itself, also contribute to its integration into the whole text, making it dependent in some way from other sentences in the same text. These dependent sentences convey information about each other, which makes them form a coherent whole. There are two other sources of this interdependence, namely, textual and discussion. The first refers to the variety of the global variable and the local connected markers in parts of the text, while the second refers to the functional relationship among these parts. The discussion source shows another macro-discipline of the language description, namely, ‘conversation analysis’. This means, that the question, that should be asked about a linguistic unit, is what the user hopes to achieve with the help of this particular language, that is, its use, in addition to its form. This problem is represented by a pragmatic component in the macro-level. In our time it is obvious, that the text component of the shift analysis considers the data in their wide scope. Therefore, this analysis will be performed in terms of text correctness, which entails variables such as word combination, repetition, ellipsis, references, substitution etc.

Pragmatic component

Unlike linguistic meaning, which can be extracted from grammatical relations within the framework of this text, a pragmatic meaning can only be analyzed, referring to the cultural and / or linguistic context of that text. Accordingly, the analysis of pragmatic changes in the translation can be carried out only by paying attention to the immediate cultural context of the situation of the source text and comparing it with the analogous one in the target language. This is necessary to indicate possible areas of change when the translator of the translation bureau is trying to convey the same message in the target language. In this connection, mention should be made of the theory of speech acts, which was initiated by some pragmatists, for example, Austin (1965). This means that the analysis must take into account such variables as the intentions of the author or the speaker, his expectation, the time of pronunciation, the meaning of the truth of utterances, other speech acts performed in the same situation, and so on. In other words, the analysis will take into account the main functions of language as a means of communication in a social environment. What is important here is that the implementation of these functions varies greatly from one language to another, which adds the need to use a pragmatic component in the current model. In fact, this variation in the realization of the pragmatic functions of the language is expressed in two phases. First, languages use different formal devices to understand similar speech acts. These formal changes include all lexical and syntactic means allowed by the grammar of each language. Secondly, the contextual spectrum, which provides for the implementation of specific actions, differs significantly depending on the culture of a particular country. In addition, at a higher level of delicacy, cultures may also differ in the rules when certain speech acts can be properly performed.

The above discussion entails that the classification of speech actions is a universal phenomenon, the linguistic implementation of these actions and the rules of their performance in one language do not necessarily have exact equivalents in another language and raise many questions related to the theory of translation. In order to understand how this happens, all these differences need to be explained to indicate possible changes in this particular area. Another requirement for this analysis is to identify in each language which formal devices are used for certain speech actions. And formal implementation is to be compared in order to indicate the mandatory and additional shifts between them.

The textual and pragmatic components of the translation model обновлено: August 28, 2017 автором: azurit