Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view

In this article the author’s intention is to touch upon only some of the aspects characterizing translation as a sociolinguistic phenomenon relevant to translator’s faithfulness. Reduction of the scope of analysis is due to the fact that the problem of relations between translatology and sociolingu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Janis Silis
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Vilnius University 2007-01-01
Series:Kalbotyra
Online Access:http://www.journals.vu.lt/kalbotyra/article/view/7575
id doaj-4d65d1f6619c45a0946112decf5282e3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4d65d1f6619c45a0946112decf5282e32020-11-24T21:35:54ZdeuVilnius UniversityKalbotyra 1392-15172029-83152007-01-015710.15388/Klbt.2007.7575Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic viewJanis Silis In this article the author’s intention is to touch upon only some of the aspects characterizing translation as a sociolinguistic phenomenon relevant to translator’s faithfulness. Reduction of the scope of analysis is due to the fact that the problem of relations between translatology and sociolinguistics is considerably more extensive and therefore requires more detailed research producing a quantitatively much bulkier text. An attempt will be made to provide a rather impressionistic contrastive analysis of translation problems appearing in certain pairs of sociolinguistic correlations, such as source/target language and social group, source/target language and age group, as well as source/target language and gender. In the last two correlation pairs (and episodically elsewhere) translator as a representative of a definite age-bound or gender-bound social group will also be viewed. This method of analysis has successfully been used by the author in his previous publications on the subject (Sîlis, 1999 and 2006), as well as repeatedly applied by the authoritative sociolinguist Peter Trudgill (2001). The illustrative material used in the article comes from author’s own observations of problemsolving cases in translation and interpreting practice cases where Latvian is either the source or the target language, and similar instances analysed in research publications of other Latvian translation theorists. In the end of the discussion part the problem of culture-specific discrepancies of the SL and TL nations, reflected also in the difference of the respective culture of verbal expression, will also be tackled. http://www.journals.vu.lt/kalbotyra/article/view/7575
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Janis Silis
spellingShingle Janis Silis
Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
Kalbotyra
author_facet Janis Silis
author_sort Janis Silis
title Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
title_short Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
title_full Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
title_fullStr Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
title_full_unstemmed Translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
title_sort translator’s faithfulness in the 21st century: a sociolinguistic view
publisher Vilnius University
series Kalbotyra
issn 1392-1517
2029-8315
publishDate 2007-01-01
description In this article the author’s intention is to touch upon only some of the aspects characterizing translation as a sociolinguistic phenomenon relevant to translator’s faithfulness. Reduction of the scope of analysis is due to the fact that the problem of relations between translatology and sociolinguistics is considerably more extensive and therefore requires more detailed research producing a quantitatively much bulkier text. An attempt will be made to provide a rather impressionistic contrastive analysis of translation problems appearing in certain pairs of sociolinguistic correlations, such as source/target language and social group, source/target language and age group, as well as source/target language and gender. In the last two correlation pairs (and episodically elsewhere) translator as a representative of a definite age-bound or gender-bound social group will also be viewed. This method of analysis has successfully been used by the author in his previous publications on the subject (Sîlis, 1999 and 2006), as well as repeatedly applied by the authoritative sociolinguist Peter Trudgill (2001). The illustrative material used in the article comes from author’s own observations of problemsolving cases in translation and interpreting practice cases where Latvian is either the source or the target language, and similar instances analysed in research publications of other Latvian translation theorists. In the end of the discussion part the problem of culture-specific discrepancies of the SL and TL nations, reflected also in the difference of the respective culture of verbal expression, will also be tackled.
url http://www.journals.vu.lt/kalbotyra/article/view/7575
work_keys_str_mv AT janissilis translatorsfaithfulnessinthe21stcenturyasociolinguisticview
_version_ 1725943497953902592