| Summary: | The original purpose of this study is to define some of the problems which, according to E. Nida in "A Framework for the Analysis and Evaluation of Theories of Translation", a translator may have to face when translating a social-dialect, in this case women's speech, between English and French.
The first chapter reviews a number of studies focusing on various features, ranging from refinement, correction and baby-talk to the characteristic vocabulary, verbosity and humour of so-called "women's speech", in order to define its specificity and to pinpoint what makes it a social dialect.
The second chapter is divided in three parts. First, some conclusions are drawn from the reviewed studies. Contradictory results prove the existence of a double-standard to evaluate the linguistic performance of a speaker according to his or her sex. They also prove that, although "women's speech" does not have a definite objective reality, it certainly reflects the very strong subjective reality of a stereotype that biases the evaluation of any female's speech.
This stereotype is then analysed and described as it is revealed by two surveys, one previously conducted among American informants, and the other, following the same model, conducted by this author among French informants. This description is followed by a review of the different vehicles that help this stereotype to perpetuate itself.
Finally, the notion of feminist speech is introduced and described as a reaction to this stereotype and its vehicles, and as a true social dialect, defined by the voluntary action of its users on language itself.
More closely related to the translation process, the third chapter concludes that Nida's remarks about sexual differences in language and the resulting difficulties in translation are irrelevant as far as translation between English and French is concerned. It also provides, through a comparison of some original texts and their translations, made either by professionals or by the author, a few examples to illustrate a number of translation problems related, in one way or another, to women and language. Some of these examples emphasize the role of the translator as that of a participant in a communication process and his responsibilities towards the sender, the message and the receiver.
The conclusion restates that, despite the fact that the term "social dialect" does not apply to "women's speech" (which exists only as a pernicious stereotype) it does apply to the feminist's language. This original error, more a matter of perspective than terminology, thus explains why the original objective of the study is not attained. Nevertheless, the description of some translation problems not specifically related to "women's speech" stresses, once again, some of the implications of the translator's role in general. === Arts, Faculty of === French, Hispanic, and Italian Studies, Department of === Graduate
|
|---|
