A study on the vietnamese-English translation of exhibit labels in the vietnam museum of ethnography

HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES Nguyễn Thị Nhàn A STUDY ON THE VIETNAMESE-ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT LABELS IN THE VIETNAM MUSEUM OF ETHNOGRAPHY (Nghiên cứu cách dịch Việt-Anh các phụ đề hiện vật tại bảo tàng dân tộc học Việt Nam) M.A.THESIS Field: Linguistics Code: 5.04.09 Hanoi, 2005 HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES DEPARTMENT OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES Nguyễn Thị Nhàn A STUDY ON THE VIETNAMESE-ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT LABELS IN THE VIETNAM MUSEUM OF ETHNOGRAPHY (Nghiên cứu cách dịch Việt-Anh các phụ đề hiện vật tại bảo tàng dân tộc học Việt Nam) By: Nguyễn Thị Nhàn Supervisor: Dr. Trần Xuân Điệp Hanoi, 2005 PART I. INTRODUCTION I. RATIONALE In Vietnam as well as in every country of the world, museums have been open to help people understand and appreciate the natural world, the history of civilizations, and the record of humanity’s artistic, scientific, and technological achievements. Museums exhibit objects of scientific, aesthetic, or historical importance for the purposes of public education and the advancement of knowledge. The Vietnam Museum of Ethnography founded in 1997 is a cultural and scientific center. It studies, collects, classifies, preserves, restores and exhibits cultural and historical values of all ethnic groups in Vietnam. People visit the museum not only to amuse themselves but also to study ethnic groups as well as various cultural values of Vietnamese people. Therefore, people from all over the country as well as foreign visitors, scientists as well as students can find interesting things in here. For the purpose of welcoming foreign visitors, all the exhibit labels are written in Vietnamese and then translated into English and French. The translation of exhibit labels is not at all an easy process as many concepts about the life of ethnic people in Vietnam do not have equivalents in the English language. The translators have to use lots of translation strategies in transferring the concepts in a way that is the most understandable to foreign visitors. However, the translators also have some difficulties in translating the concepts for the problem of non-equivalence at word level. So far, little research on the Vietnamese – English translation of exhibit labels has been done. Therefore, an investigation on the Vietnamese – English translation of exhibit labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography is really necessary. In the hope for some suggestions of implications that can be of some use to those who are responsible for translating exhibit labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography as well as in other museums, the author would like to carry out this minor thesis to answer the question: What are the translation strategies and procedures used in the translation of exhibit labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography (VME)? II. SCOPE OF THE STUDY There are several types of exhibit labels in a museum: title or headline labels giving the title of an exhibit; primary or introductory labels providing an overview or introduction to the exhibit; secondary or text labels giving an intermediate level of information between an introductory label and the more specific object labels; and object labels providing information, such as description or title, date or age, artist or user, material composition, and sometimes a brief text on a particular object. This study limits itself to the analysis of the Vietnamese-English translation of object labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography in Hanoi. III. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY This study aims at: Analysing the strategies and procedures used in the translation of exhibit labels from Vietnamese to English in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography. Working out the difficulties of translation process that the translators in the museum may have. Giving some suggestions for the problems. IV. METHODS OF THE STUDY To accomplish this thesis, we will go through a number of materials on translation studies to build up a theoretical background for the research. Then, as it was stated in the aims and scope of the study, we will collect the authentic exhibit labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography in Nguyen Van Huyen street, Cau Giay district, Hanoi for description and analysis. From these sources, we will analyse and draw out the methods and techniques used in the translation. Furthermore, some translators who have translated the labels, will also be interviewed for more specific information about the translation. V. DESIGN OF THE STUDY This study consists of three major parts: Introduction, Development, and Conclusion; a bibliography, and some photographs for illustration. Part I - Introduction The rationale of the study is given in this part. It also gives the aims, scope and methods of the study. Part II - Development Chapter I - Literature review This chapter provides the theory of translation, translation equivalence, translation strategies and procedures. Chapter II - The translation of exhibit labels in the Vietnam Museum of Ethnography This chapter presents the current context of the translation of exhibit labels in VME; it also deals with the methods and procedures used in the translation. Part III – Conclusion This part summarises all the things mentioned in chapter II and gives comments on the suggestions for better translation and further research on the problem. The appendix shows photographs for illustration. PART II – DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER I – TRANSLATION THEORIES I.1. Definition of translation Translation has been approached from a scientific point of view by linguists through times and thus has been defined variously. Many have concluded that translation is scarcely an aspect of applied linguistics or it is just regarded as a complicated process of communicating, in which one decodes from one language and encodes into another. Some others, who have considered translation as something scientific, however, think of translation merely in terms of complex techniques of comparative linguistics (Jumpet 1961, Carry and Jumpet, 1963). In order to find an adequate definition of translation, prominent figures in linguistics such as Cat Ford, Bell, Hatim & Mason, Nida, and many others have carried out careful analyses of the process of translating, especially in the case of source and receptor languages having quite different linguistic structures and cultural features. We start with a definition quoted from the Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (1992:4739): “Translation is the replacement of a text in one language (Source Language-SL) by an equivalent text in another language (Target Language-TL).” And it is then followed by the linguists’ definitions: “Translation is the expression in another language of what has been expressed in another, source language, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences.” Bell (1991:5) “Translation is basically a change of form. In translation the form of the source language is replaced by the form of the receptor (target) language.” Larson, M.L. (1984:3) “Translation is a communicative process which takes place within a social context.” Hatim & Mason (1990:3) “Translating consists of producing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent to the message of the source language, first in meaning and secondly in style.” Nida, E.A. (1975:33) These five definitions, in spite of slight differences in the expressions, share common features that they all emphasize the importance of finding the closest equivalence in meaning by the choice of appropriate target language’s lexical and grammatical structures, communication situation, and cultural context. Through their definitions these scholars also confirm the possibilities of effective interlingual communication by translation if a set of basic requirements which are considered “Laws of Translation” could be achieved. Nida (1964:164) proposes four major principles: Making sense Conveying the spirit and manner of the original Having a natural and easy form of expression Producing a similar response Whereas Savory (1968:54) sets up twelve objectives for a translation: A translation must give words of the original A translation must give the idea of the original A translation should read like an original work A translation should read like a translation A translation should reflect the style of the original A translation should possess the style of the original A translation should read as a contemporary of the original A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation A translation may add to or omit from the original A translation may never add to or omit from the original A translation of verse should be in prose A translation of prose should be in prose Nida and Savory’s principles are different in number. However, they all pay their first attention to correspondence of meaning over correspondence of style. And it is also recognizable that equivalence in both meaning and style cannot always be retained altogether. In concrete textual situation, it is the translator that decides which principles must be achieved and it is the meaning that must have priority over the stylistic forms. I.2. Translation equivalence Equivalence can be considered a central concept in translation theory; many theorists define translation in terms of equivalence relation. Pym (1992) has even pointed to its circularity: equivalence is supposed to define translation, and translation, in turn, defines equivalence. Here are some elaborate approaches to translation equivalence: Nida 91964) distinguishes formal equivalence and dynamic translation as basic orientations rather than as a binary choice: + Formal equivalence is achieved when the source language and target language words have the closest possible match of form and content. + Dynamic equivalence is achieved when the source language and target language words have the same effect on their effective readers Newmark (1988a) terms Nida’s dynamic equivalence as ‘equivalence effect’ or ‘equivalence response’ principle: “the overriding purpose of any translation should be to achieve ‘equivalence effect’, that is to produce the same effect (or one as close as possible) on the readership of the translation as was obtained on the readership of the original” (Newmark 1988a). He also sees equivalence effect as the desirable result rather than the aim of any translation except for two cases: (1) if the purpose of the source language text is to affect and the target language translation is to inform or vice versa; (2) if there is a pronounced cultural gap between the source language and the target language text. Koller (1979) considers five types of equivalence: + Denotative equivalence: the source language and target language words refer to the same thing in the real world. + Connotative equivalence: provides additional values besides denotative and is achieved by the translator’s choice of synonymous words or expressions. + Text-normative equivalence: the source language and target language words are used in the same or similar context in their respective languages + Pragmatic equivalence: with readership orientation, the source language and target language words have the same effect on their respective readers. + Formal equivalence: produces and analogy of form in the translation by either exploiting formal possibilities of target language, or creating new forms in target language. I.3. Non-equivalence at word level According to Baker (1992:20), non-equivalence at word level means that the TG has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the ST. The type and level of difficulty posed can vary tremendously depending on the nature of non-equivalence. Different kinds of non-equivalence require different strategies, some very straightforward, others more involved and difficult to handle I.3.1. Different kinds of non-equivalence (a) Culture-specific concepts The SL word may express a concept which is totally unknown in the target culture. The concept in question may be abstract or concrete; it may relate to a religious belief, a social custom, or even a type of food. Such concepts are often referred to as ‘culture-specific’. Speaker (of the House of Commons) has no equivalent in many languages. It is often translated into Russian as ‘Chairman’, which does not reflect the role of the speaker of the House of Commons as an independent person who maintains authority and order in Parliament. (b) The SL concept is not lexicalised in the TL The SL word may express a concept which is known in the target culture but simply not lexicalised, i.e. not allocated a TL word to express it. Landslide has no ready equivalence in many languages, although it simply means ‘overwhelming majority’. (c) The SL word is semantically complex This is a fairly common problem in translation. A single word which consists of a single morpheme can sometimes express a more complex set of meanings than a whole sentence. (d) The SL and TL make different distinctions in meaning The TL may make more or fewer distinctions in meaning than the SL. What one language regards as an important distinction in meaning another may not perceive as relevant. (e) The TL lacks a superordinate The TL may have specific words (hyponyms) but no general word (superordinate) to head the semantic field. (f) The TL lacks a specific term (hyponym) More commonly, languages tend to have general words but lack specific ones, since each language makes only those distinctions in meaning which seem relevant to its particular environment. English has many hyponyms under article for which it is difficult to find precise equivalents in other languages, for example feature, survey, report, review and many more. (g) Differences in physical or interpersonal perspective Physical perspective may be of more importance in one language than it is in another. Physical perspective has to do with where things or people are in relation to one another or to a place, as expressed in pairs of words such as come/go, take/bring. (h) Differences in expressive meaning There may be a TL word which has the same propositional meaning as the SL word, but it may have a different expressive meaning. The difference may be considerable or it may be subtle but important enough to pose a translation problem in a given context. Differences in expressive meaning are usually more difficult to handle when the TL equivalent is more emotionally loaded than the SL item. This is often the case with items which relate to sensitive issues such as religion, politics and sex. (i) Differences in form There is often no equivalent in the TL for a particular form in the source text. Certain suffixes and prefixes which convey propositional and other types of meaning in English often have no direct equivalents in other languages. English has many couplets such as employer/employee, trainer/trainee, and payer/payee. (j) Differences in frequency and purpose of using specific forms Even when a particular form does have a ready equivalent in the TL, there may be a difference in the frequency with which it is used or the purpose for which it is used. English uses the continuous –ing form for binding clauses much more frequently than other languages which have equivalents for it. (k) The use of loan words in the source text The use of loan words in the ST poses a special problem in translation. Quite apart from their respective propositional meaning, loan words such as au fait, chic in English are often used for their prestige value, because they can add an air of sophistication to the text or its subject matter. This is often lost in translation because it is not always possible to find a loan word with the same meaning in the TL. I.3.2. Strategies used by professional translators (a) Translation by a more general word (superordinate) This is one of the commonest strategies for dealing with many types of non-equivalence, particularly in the area of propositional meaning. It works equally well in most, if not all, languages, since the hierarchical structure of semantic fields is not language-specific. (b) Translation by a more neutral /less expressive word Baker (1992:29) gives an example to illustrate this. Source text: the shamanic practices we have investigated are rightly seen as an archaic mysticism. Target text (back-translated from Japanese): the shamanic behaviour which we have been researching should rightly be considered as ancient mysticism. The translator could have used a Japanese phrase which means ‘behind the times’ and which would have been closer to both the propositional and expressive meanings of archaic. This, however, would have been too direct, that is too openly disapproving by Japanese standards. The expressive meaning of archaic is lost in the translation. (c) Translation by cultural substitution This strategy involves replacing a culture-specific item or expression with a target-language item which does not have the same propositional meaning but is likely to have a similar impact on the target reader. The main advantage of this strategy is that it gives the reader a concept with he/she can identify, something familiar and appealing. E.g. Source text: The Patrick Collection has restaurant facilities to suit every taste – from the discerning gourmet, to the Cream Tea expert. Target text (back translated from Italian): to satisfy all tastes: from those of the demanding gastronomist to those of the expert in pastry. In Britain, ‘cream tea’ is ‘an afternoon meal consisting of tea to drink and scones with jam and clotted cream to eat. It can also include sandwiches and cakes. ‘Cream tea’ has no equivalent in other cultures. The Italian replaced it with ‘pastry’, which does not have the same meaning. However, ‘pastry’ is familiar to the Italian reader and therefore provides a good cultural substitute. (d) Translation using a loan word or loan word plus explanation This strategy is particularly common in dealing with culture-specific items, modern concepts, and buzz words. Following the loan word with an explanation is very useful when the word in question is repeated several times in the text. Once explained, the loan word can be used on its own; the reader can understand it and is not distracted by further lengthy explanations E.g. Source text: Morning coffee and traditional cream teas are served in the conservatory. Target text (back-translated from Japanese): Morning coffee and traditional afternoon tea and cream cakes can be enjoyed in the conservatory (green house) The underlined word in the ST is used as loan words in the Japanese text, not because they have no equivalents in Japanese but because they sound more modern, smart, high class. (e) Translation by paraphrase using a related word This strategy tends to be used when the concept expressed by the source item is lexicalised in the TL but in a different form, and when the frequency with which a certain form is used in the source text is significantly higher than would be natural in the TL. E.g. Source text: There is strong evidence, however that giant pandas are related to the bears. Target text (back-translated from Chinese): but there is rather strong evidence that shows that big pandas have a kinship relation with the bears. (f) Translation by paraphrase using unrelated words If the concepts expressed by the source item is not lexicalised at all in the TL, the paraphrase strategy can still be used in some contexts. Instead of a related word, the paraphrase may be based on modifying a superordinate or simply on unpacking the meaning of the source item, particularly if the item in question is semantically complex. E.g. Source text: ….the lower mixed broadleaf forests….are the areas most assessible to and disturbed by Man. Target text (back-