The translation issues of chemical materials and the Application

INTRODUCTION 1. Rationale Nowadays, the world is confronted with challenges of socio-economic technology and scientific development. Everywhere people are talking about integration and cooperation to develop and deal with global issues. In such a context, the vital role of English, an international language is a big bridge to connect nations. In the process of technology transfer, translating English texts into target languages or vice versa is indispensable. In Vietnam, chemistry section has been rapidly developed and expanded. In the support of chemistry development, there are some English and Vietnamese dictionaries of chemistry. However, the translation of English documents in this field is in great demand. Besides, translating materials in general and materials in chemistry in particular from English into Vietnamese or vice versa always creates difficulties because of the differences between the two languages. In the process of translating chemical materials, I have realized that English noun phrases, which frequently occur in the texts, always cause difficulties for translators. The noun phrases are long, complicated and sometimes ambiguous in meaning. If translators do not understand the nature of noun phrase structures in both languages they can mistranslate or convey wrong meaning. It goes without saying that there are many other things involved in the process of translation. In addition to semantic characteristics there exists the biggest differences of structural organization of noun phrases in English and Vietnamese. So it is necessary to point out the characteristics of English noun phrases and compare them with Vietnamese ones to help both researchers and translators. That is why the study report aims at examining some of these areas. It is hoped that the report will be of some use to those who are responsible for translating texts in chemistry in Vietnam. 2. Aims of the study The first question of the study is to identify and point out basic semantic and structural characteristics of English noun phrases in chemical materials. The study is also aimed to analyse English chemical noun phrases in selected materials by comparing them with Vietnamese equivalents and provide suggestions for translation of materials in chemistry to achieve accurate, clear and natural translated versions. 3. Scope of the study Two research questions in the preceding part have already implied that the research is focused solely on noun phrases in some selected materials rather than in the whole source language text and the translated versions in chemistry. To be more specific the study will examine the differences and similarities between noun phrases in English and Vietnamese and their equivalents based on their semantic and structural characteristics. The sources of data are official documents with the source language texts and their translated versions from Department of Chemistry, Army Institute of Technology Assessment . 4. Methods of the study The study uses collective, descriptive, and contrastive methods of language research. The particularization of English and Vietnamese noun phrases will be done by descriptive and contrastive methods. Equivalent noun phrases in two languages will be compared in terms of structural and semantic relations. To accomplish this thesis, we will, firstly, go through a number of materials on translation and noun phrases to build up a theoretical background for the research. The paper then will base on reviewing materials in the field of chemistry in order to collect noun phrases for description, analysis, comparison and induction. I also have interviews and discussions with colleages and friends who are readers or translators in the field of chemistry to find out better information and suggestions for the study and the translation of chemistry noun phrases. 5. Design of the study The study consists of three main parts: Introduction, Development and Conclusion. The introduction gives the rationale for the study. It also outlines the scope, aims of and the methods of the study. The development comprises three chapters. Chapter I provides the theory of English noun phrase and translation. Chapter II discusses the semantic and structural characteristics of chemical noun phrases in the selected materials. The final chapter studies the translation issues of chemical materials and the application in translating English chemical noun phrases into Vietnamese. The conclusion presents issues addressed and not addressed in the study and suggestions for further study in future. DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1: Theoretical background 1. Noun phrases 1.1 Concept of a Phrase This section is started with the quotation of the definition from the Longman Dictionary of Comtemporary English (1992) which says " a phrase is a group of words without a finite verb". Example: Her expensive car Working in the garden Traditional grammars use "phrase" to refer to a special kind of embedded sentence, one without a finite verb. On the other hand, Halliday in his functional approach would rather deal with "group" than with ''phrase". He explains that a phrase is different from a group in that, whereas a group is an expansion of word, a phrase is a contraction of clause. Phrases are usually classified according to their central word or head. Eg. Noun phrase, verb phrase, ... I find it easier to understand the definition of phrase in Longman Dictionary Comtemporary English. 1.2 Concept of a Noun phrase 1.2.1 Traditional grammar and the concept of a noun phrase The noun phrase can be defined in many ways, however, most scholars of traditional grammar agree on the following definition which is quoted from A Grammar of Contemporary English”. (Quirk and Greenbaum, 1972, P.127). "The noun phrase is that element in the sentence which typically functions as subject, object and complement''. It can be inferred from the definition that the functions of noun phrases bring about the recognition of noun phrases. For example: This paper suggests the solution for vegetable and fruit manufacture Subject (S) Object (O) Complement of prepositional phrase (C) Noun phrases can be identified from their functions. A noun phrase is thus composed of three potential parts: the head, premodifier and postmodifier. The head is generally obligatory, whereas the presence of the other two parts is optional. Example: The handsome man sitting next to me is … Noun phrase In the above example, the head is "man" the premodifier is "the handsome" and the postmidifier is "sitting next to me". According to traditional grammarians, the three parts of a noun phrase can be distinguished as follows: + The head: around which the other components cluster and which dictates concord and other kinds of congruence with the rest of the sentence outside the noun phrase. + The premodifier: which comprises all the items placed before the head -typically adjectives and nouns. + The postmodifier: consisting of all the items after the head - dominantly prepositional phrases, non-finte clauses and relative clauses. And it should be noted that modification can be restrictive and non-restrictive. This means that the head can be viewed as a member of a class which can be linguistically identified only through the modification that has been supplied (restrictive). Or the head can be viewed as unique or as a member of a class that has been independently identified ( that is, in a preceding sentence) any modification given to such a head is additional information which has no role in pointing out the head, and we call it non-restrictive. In the example, Mr. Brown's daughter who is married is a teacher. Premodifier Head Postmodifier (restrictive) It can be concluded that Mr.Brown has more than one daughter and the daughter in this sentence is only identifiable as a teacher by means of the postmodifier in the form of a relative clause ''who is married". This modification is restrictive. In contrast, in the following sentence Mr. Brown's daughter, who is married, is a teacher. Premodifier Head Postmodifier Mr. Brown has only one daughter. Therefore, the postmodifier "who is married" which is put between two commas does not function as a signal to identify this daugter. It just gave additional information on the subject mentioned and this postmodifier is non-restrictive. Modification at "its most restrictive" tends to come after the head and it tends to be given more prosodic emphasis than the head, while non-restrictive modification tends to be unstressed in prehead position, while in post head position, its parenthetic relation is endorsed by being given a separate tone unit, or in writing, by being enclosed by commas. Nowadays linguists have more sufficient definitions of the noun phrase which reveal its basic syntactic, structural and transformational features: " A noun phrase is any word group that has the following features: i) Typically having a noun as head ii) Able to be moved in sentence transformation ( in making questions, passives, relative clauses,...). iii) Able functioning as subject, object and complement in the sentence". Among those linguists is Halliday. In the next part, his concept of a noun phrase will be described. 1.2.2. Halliday's concept of a noun phrase According to Halliday, a nominal group structure, as he puts it, contains the head noun, preceded and followed by various other items, all of them in some way characterising the head noun. It can be described as follows: Premodifier Head (things) Postmodifier Example: The recent arrival of a militia regiment in the neighbourhood. Premodifier Head Postmodifier Halliday names all the elements which follow the thing "qualifier", thus we have the structure: Premodifier Head Qualifier In Halliday's structure analysis of a nominal group, the head is often assumed "the thing". This is semantic core of the nominal group. It may be common noun, proper noun or the personal pronoun. The premodifier, as its name suggests, precedes the head and has the functions of specifying (i) a class of thing, and (ii) some categories of membership within the class. The membership within the class is expressed by one or more of the functional elements: Deictic, Numerative, Epithet and classifier. Qualifier follows the head, either a phrase or a clause. The qualifier also has the functions of characterizing the thing, however, the characterization here is in terms of some process within which the head is directly or indirectly a participant. It may be a major process ( a relative clause) or a minor one ( a propositional phrase). 2. Translation 2.1 Definition Through readings in translation theory, we can see how complicated translation is. Translation has been variously defined by different linguists. The following are some typical definitions which may give more useful understanding to students of Translation. Translation is the replacement of a representation of a text in one language by a representation of an equivalent text in a second language. ( Hatman and Stock 1972: 713) (R.T. Bell 1991:20) Translation is the expression in another language or ( target language) of what have been expressed in another source language preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences. ( Dubois 1973) (R.T. Bell 1991:5) Translation is a communicative process which takes place within a social context ( Hatim & Mason 1990:3) Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written message and/ or statement in one language by the same message and/ or statement in another language. (Peter Newmark, Approaches to Translation , P.7) Further more, translation has different principles: - A translation must give words of the original - A translation must give the ideas 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 translation - A translation should possess the style of the translation - A translation should read as a contemporary of the original - A translation should read as a contemporary of the translation - A translation may never add to or omit from the original - A translation of verse should be in prose - A translation of verse should be in verse. Though these definitions are accessed by different linguists, at different time and from different contexts, they share some common features: some sort of movement from one language to another, some kind of content and the requirement to find equivalents which have similar characteristics to the original. My favourite definition of translation is Peter Newmark's. In his definition consists translation of both written and spoken languages which are two important means of communication. 2.2 Translation methods We follow Newmark's concepts of communicative and semantic translation which is shown in the following diagram (Newmark 1988a: P. 99) Source Language Bias Target Language Bias Literal Free Faithful Idiomatic Semantic/Communicative These two methods of translation appropriate to any texts. Communicative translation attempts to produce on its readers an effect as close as possible to that obtained on the readers of the original. Semantic translation attempts to render as closely as the semantic and syntactic structures of the second language allow, the exact contextual meaning of the original. Although there are differences between the two methods, equivalent effect is secured in communicative as in semantic translation. In semantic translation, the translator has to be legal to the author and respects the context, therefore, semantic translation is more objective. Newmark (1988a:63) proposed Interlinear translation when considering semantic translation. The primary senses of all words in the original are translated as though out of context and the word order of the original retained. The main purpose is either to understand the mechanic of the source language or to constitute a pre-translation procedure for a complicated source language text. Since the form of the text is important, semantic translation may well not read like an original target language text. In communicative translation, Newmark ( 1988a:42) states that translators have the right to correct or impove the logic, to replace clumsy with elegant, or at least functional, syntactic structure, to remove obscurities, to eliminate repetition and tautology, to exclude the less likely interpretations of an ambiguity, to modify and clarify Jargon (i.e. reduce loose generic terms to rather more concrete components) and to norminate bizarreries of idiolect, i.e wayward uses of language). Further, one has the right to concrete mistakes of fact and slips, normally stating what one has done in a foot note. The transition to communicative translation normally makes the text smoother, lighter, more idiomatic and easier to read. Syntax is remodelled, commoner, collocations and more usual words are found. All these are done to show that communicative translation is intended primarily to achieve a certain effect on its readers' minds. As a result, it is more subjective. In actual practice: a combination of the two methods is the best way to reproduce the greatest possible degree of the meaning of the original-the heart of the meaning being the message in communicative translation - the significance, the enduring value and importance in semantic translation. To sum up, we have studied the object of the study i.e. the noun phrase in English and Vietnamese. We also review the translation theory in order to access to different approaches to translation. From these that we can realize that the combination of the two methods - semantic translation and communicative translation - is the most suitable to the chemical materials. 2.3 Technical transaltion Sofer ( 1991) approaches technical translation by distinguishing it from literary translation "The main division in the translation field is between literary anf technical translation". According to him, literal translation covers such areas as fiction, poetry, drama and humanities in general and is done by writers of the same kind in the target language, or at least by translators with the required literary aptitude. Meanwhile, technical translation is done by a much greater number of practitioners and is an ever-growing and expanding field with excellent opportunites. To define it he writes "One way of defining technical translation is by asking the question, does the subject being translated require a specialized vocabulary, or is the language non-specialized? If the text being translated includes specialized terms in a given field, then the translation is technical”. Newmark ( 1981) differently distinguishes technical translation from institutional translation. "Technical translation is one of part of specialised translation, institutional translation, the area of politics, commerce, finance, government, etc. is the other." He goes on to suggest that technical translation is potentially non-cultural and universal because the benefits of technology are not confined to one speech community. The two authors, though having different approaches to technical translation, they both view it as specialized translation with its essential element - "specialized noun phrases". 2.4 Translation equivalence Equivalence can be said to be the central issue in translation although its definition, relevance and applicability within the field of translation theory have caused heated controversy. The concept of equivalence has been one of the key words in translation studies. Jakobson regards translation equivalence as being essentially a transfer of the message from the source language to the target language and a pragmatic/ semantic approach to translation. Using both linguistic and communicative approach Baker distinguishes three main types of equivalence. They are grammatical, textual and pragmatic equivalence. Grammatical equivalence refers to the diversity of grammatical categories across languages, whereas textual equivalence deals with the equivalence between a source language text and a language text in terms of information and cohesion. Pragmatic equivalence refers to implicatures and strategies of avoidance during the translation process. Besides, equivalence can be classified into equivalence at word level and above word level. For example, at word level, the word "dance" in English means "nhảy" in Vietnamese but "give a hand" in English means "giúp đỡ" in Vietnamese and it is the equivalence above word level. The later English expression literally means something like " đưa cho một tay" but in Vietnamese it would not be unacceptable. So we can not base ourselves on the meaning of the words individually. Koller (1979), on the other hand consider following types of equivalence: + Denotative equivalence: the source language and the target language words refers to the same thing in the real world. + Connotative equivalence: This type of equivalence provides additional value besides denotative value and is achieved by the translator's choice of synonymous words or expressions. + Text-normative equivalence: the source language and the target language words are used in the same or similar context in their respective languages. + Pragmatic equivalence: With readership orientation, the source language and the target language words have the same effect on their respective readers. + Formal equivalence: This type of equivalence produces an analogy of form in the tranlation by either exploiting formal possibilities of target language, or creating new forms in target language. In short, the notion of equivalence is undoubtedly one of the most problematic and controverial areas in the field