Abstract | In this paper, I present a METONYMIC THEORY OF TRANSLATION. I argue that the work of the translator is concerned more with the processing of metonymic equivalents between the source and target language than the literal one-to-one substitution of linguistic items. Categories between languages rarely correspond exactly and the relationship between source and target text is rarely metaphorical; instead, it is the middle ground of near approximations and partial overlaps which best describes translation. I consider the contribution from the translation-studies literature of ‘shift’ theory (eg Catford 1965, Vinay & Darbelnet 1995[1958]) and schemes for solving problems created by conventional metaphor (eg Baker 2011, Broeck 1981, Dagut 1976, Newmark 1982). I reinterpret the notion of ‘shift’ in terms of metonymy and re-characterize figurative language as far more than an occasional obstacle around idioms, but rather a universal enabler and the basis of translation itself. I demonstrate, using original data, that metonymic processing is involved both in writing first drafts (termed ‘interlingual translation’ by Jakobson (2004 [1959])) and in producing final versions through revision (‘intralingual translation’ (Jakobson ibid)). The METONYMIC THEORY OF TRANSLATION presented here is grounded in a more general theory of metonymy, in which the cognitive ability to recognize part-whole relations between signs and parts of signs plays a vital role right across the spectrum of linguistic phenomena. I end the paper by suggesting that the lens of metonymy is also a useful tool for understanding knowledge by allowing us to integrate partial truths into unified wholes and resolve differences between competing theories. Baker, M. 2011. In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation. 2nd edition. London: Routledge. Broeck, R. van den. 1981. ‘The Limits of Translatability Exemplified by Metaphor Translation’ in Poetics Today. 2/4:73-87. Catford, J. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dagut, M. 1976. ‘Can “Metaphor” be Translated?’ in Babel. 22/1:21-33. Jakobson, R. 2004 [1959]. ‘On Linguistic Aspects of Translation’ extract in L. Venuti (ed). The Translation Studies Reader. 2nd edition. London: Routledge. 138-143. Newmark, P. 1982. Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon. Vinay, J. & J. Darbelnet. 1995 [1958]. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology of Translation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. |
---|