Luận văn thạc sĩ VNU ULIS a translation quality assessment of the vietnamese version of chapter 6 in the novel lady chatterleys lover using j houses model m a thesis

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

CAO HUYỀN TRANG

A TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE
VIETNAMESE VERSION OF CHAPTER 6 IN THE NOVEL
“LADY CHATTERLEY’S LOVER” USING J. HOUSE’S MODEL
(ĐÁNH GIÁ CHẤT LƯỢNG BẢN DỊCH TIẾNG VIỆT CHƯƠNG 6 TIỂU

THUYẾT NGƯỜI TÌNH PHU NHÂN CHATTERLEY DỰA TRÊN MƠ
HÌNH CỦA HOUSE)

MA MINOR THESIS

Major: English Linguistics
Code: 60.22.02.01

HANOI - 2014

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

CAO HUYỀN TRANG

A TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF THE

VIETNAMESE VERSION OF CHAPTER 6 IN THE NOVEL
“LADY CHATTERLEY’S LOVER” USING J. HOUSE’S MODEL
(ĐÁNH GIÁ CHẤT LƯỢNG BẢN DỊCH TIẾNG VIỆT CHƯƠNG 6 TIỂU
THUYẾT NGƯỜI TÌNH PHU NHÂN CHATTERLEY DỰA TRÊN MƠ
HÌNH CỦA HOUSE)

MA MINOR THESIS
Major:

English Linguistics

Code:

60.22.02.01

Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. LÊ HÙNG TIẾN

HANOI - 2014

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


DECLARATION

I, Cao Huyen Trang, hereby declare that this thesis, which is entitled “A translation
quality assessment of the Vietnamese version of Chapter 6 in the novel "Lady
Chatterley's lover" using J. House's model", has not been submitted as an exercise
for a degree at this or any other university and it is entirely my own work as the
result of my own original research. All materials used as references in this thesis are
quoted clearly with their sources while data collection and results were

comprehensively done by me.

Signature

CAO HUYỀN TRANG

i

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance and the help
of several individuals around me, to only some of whom it is possible to give
particular mention here.
First and foremost, I would like to express my utmost gratitude to my advisor
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lê Hùng Tiến for his motivation, enthusiasm, and immense
knowledge. From the early stage, it was his fascinating lectures on translation
studies that inspired me to conduct this thesis. During the process this thesis was
conducted, I have received his valuable guidance, insightful comments and sincere
encouragement that I would never forget. My sincerest thanks go to my tremendous
mentor for encouraging my research and for allowing me to grow as a research
scientist.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude toward my whole family and my
friends for their kind support and great encouragement which urges me in
completing this thesis.

ii

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

ABSTRACT
The field of translation has never witnesses a strongly increase in the
requirement for literary translation before. Thanks to good translations, readers over
the world are offered a chance to access and enjoy many timeless works. This field,
however, involves various challenges. Therefore, this minor thesis aims at
discovering many factors causing to these difficulties and suggesting several
recommendations to improve the quality of translation. More specifically, the thesis
attempts to evaluate the quality of the Vietnamese version of Chapter 6 in the novel
"Lady Chatterley's lover" using J. House's model. Based on the analysis of this text,
some major findings and suggestion of phonological and cultural problems might be
drawn as well. Furthermore, the study shows that the application of covert
translation and abuse of some Vietnamese colloquial expressions tend to lower the
true value of the source text so that readers are likely to experience a “sloppy
translation” with pornographic rather than erotic scenes due to its preference of
physical element to spiritual one.

iii

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

SL: Source Language
TL: Target Language
ST: Source Language Text
TT: Target Language Text
TQA: Translation Quality Assessment

iv

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS
Figure 1.A model for translation quality assessment by House (1977).
Figure 2: A Scheme for Analyzing and Comparing Original and Translation Text in
by House (1997).

v

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ......................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..........................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... v
PART A: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
1. Rationale ................................................................................................................ 1
2. Aims of the study ................................................................................................... 2
3. Scope of the study ................................................................................................... 2
4. Methodology of the study ...................................................................................... 3
5. Design of the study.................................................................................................. 3
PART B: DEVELOPMENT..................................................................................... 4
Chapter 1. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................... 4

1.1. Literary translation ............................................................................................... 4
1.1.1. Definition of literary translation ....................................................................... 4
1.1.2. Difficulties of literary translation ...................................................................... 5
1.1.2.1. Cultural translation problems ......................................................................... 6
1.2.2.2. Stylistic translation problems ......................................................................... 7
1.2.2.3. Linguistic translation problems ...................................................................... 7
1.2.2.4. Text specific translation problems ................................................................. 7
1.2. Translation quality assessment ............................................................................. 8
1.2.1. The role of translation quality assessment ........................................................ 8
1.2.2. Approaches towards translation quality assessment ........................................ 9
1.2.3. Previous models for translation quality assessment ........................................ 11
1.2.3.1. Nida‟s response-based approach .................................................................. 11
1.2.3.2. Koller‟s text-based approach ....................................................................... 11
1.2.3.3. Peter Newmark‟s comprehensive criticism approach .................................. 12

vi

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


1.3. House‟s model of translation quality assessment ............................................. 13
1.3.1. House‟ original model ..................................................................................... 13
1.3.2. House‟s revised translation quality assessment model ................................... 16
1.4. Summary ............................................................................................................ 17
Chapter 2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ........................................................ 18
2.1. Source Language Text Analysis ........................................................................ 18
2.1.1. Source Language Text Background ................................................................ 18
2.1.2. Analysis of ST in accordance with House's model ......................................... 19
2.1.3. Statement of function ...................................................................................... 28
2.2. ST and TT comparison and Statement of Quality.............................................. 29

2.2.1. ST and TT comparison for mismatches .......................................................... 29
2.2.2. Statement of Quality ....................................................................................... 36
PART C. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 38
3.1. Recapitulation .................................................................................................... 38
3.2. Concluding remarks ........................................................................................... 38
3.3. Recommendations .............................................................................................. 40
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 41
Appendix A. The Dialects used in the source text ..................................................... I
Appendix B. Comparison between Source Language Text and Target
Language Text ...........................................................................................................IV

vii

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale for the study
The field of translation, especially literary translation has undergone many
shifts and trends over the last few decades with wide-range arguments. Numerous
approaches have come and gone in a hope to define “a good literary translation”
which satisfies all the requirements of literary translation. To resolve these issues,
many theories have been proposed and applied in an attempt to assess the quality of
a translation. This would be of great benefit for both translators and readers in
Vietnam nowadays after some mishaps in literary translation. It is obvious that there
have been many literary translations so far such as Harry Porter, Twilight, The
Miserables, The call of the wild, Woman in love, Lady Chatterley‟s lover, etc.
However, the quality of these translations still involves countless arguments
because of conflicting theories. Thus, it is vital to address an appropriate theory for
evaluating translation quality. Among them, Juliane House with her well-known

model for assessing translation quality is widely accepted. Despite of its
unavoidable limitations, J. House‟s model, based mainly on the theory of functional
grammar by K. Halliday, is chosen by most researchers thanks to its best
applicability.
Feeling interested in D.H.Lawrence‟s novels, especially Lady Chatterley‟s
Lover, the researcher tries to conduct this minor thesis with a hope that it would be
of help for translators, readers and other of concern. With its four-letter words and
its explicit descriptions of sexual intercourse, Lady Chatterley‟s Lover is the novel
with which D.H. Lawrence is most often associated. First published privately in
Florence in 1928, it attracted countless controversies due to the reputation of being
a sordid book. Also, its present Vietnamese version by Ho Anh Quang is still a
matter of criticism. Among other chapters, chapter 6 is an interesting one with
Connie‟s new awareness of the self and sexuality through a beauty revelation
featured with erotic scenes.

1

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


2. Aims of the study
The overall aim of the study was to apply J.House‟s TQA model in order to
evaluate the quality of the Vietnamese version of Chapter 6 in the novel "Lady
Chatterley's lover translated by Ho Anh Quang. Specifically, the research tries to
analyze the source text and target text using House‟s model, in the light of
M.A.K Halliday‟s theory to assess the quality of the translation, find out some
mismatches between the two texts and draw a conclusion of what type of
translation is employed. The thesis also suggests some implications for a better
edition of this novel.
To achieve this aim, the two research questions are generated as follows:

- How good is the quality of translation text in the light of House‟s model?
- What need to be done to improve the quality of the translation?
3. Scope of the study
Within the scope of a minor thesis, it is impossible to analyze the entire
novel “Lady Chatterley‟s Lover” with 19 chapters. Therefore, the thesis will focus
only on analyzing Chapter 6 which raises Connie‟s new awareness of the self and
sexuality and appraises Lawrence‟s bitter indictment of modern industrial society
and explicitly describe sexual intercourse between man and woman. This chapter
consists of 13 pages, from page 46 to page 58, published in 2005 by Wordworth
Editions Limited. As mentioned above, with this controversial novel, D.H.
Lawrence took a different view of the relationship between the two sexes than was
generally mentioned before. Thus, it is unsurprising that this novel was considered
as a pornographic rather than erotic work until 1960. Like its original text,
Vietnamese version also attracts countless attention from translators, readers and
literary critics. Therefore, this thesis is conducted in hope to present a
comprehensive analysis of this literary translation as well as seek the true value of
the novel.

2

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


4. Methodology of the study
This thesis is conducted to investigate the translation quality of Chapter 6 in
the novel “Lady Chatterley‟s Lover‟ by D.H. Lawrence, applying Julian House‟s
model, which is set up on the basis of functional pragmatic theories of language use.
To conduct this research, qualitative analysis is employed to study an
individual text closely. More specific, the chapter 6 of the novel Lady Chatterley‟s
Lover‟ was selected for assessment based on J. House‟s model (1977) with eight

dimensions of language use and language user. Also, the analysis makes a strong
comparison between ST and TT in order to find out mismatches on each dimension
and declares the quality of translation. Descriptive and comparative techniques are
also used to evaluate the translation text. The data for this study is collected through
the procedure of critical analyzing, based on House‟s model.
5. Design of the study
This research is presented in three chapters as bellow:
 Part A: Introduction - gives an overview of the rationale, aim, scope,
methodology and design of the study
 Part B: Development
- Chapter 1: Literature Review – presents an overview of some related
concepts of translation theory and some typical models of translation quality
assessment.
- Chapter 2: Results and discussion – analyzes the source text, the
target text as well as compare the two texts based on the framework provided
in chapter 1.
 Part C: Conclusion - summarizes the results of the research and suggests
some recommendations for a better translation.

3

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


PART B
DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter is designed to re-examine some fundamental concepts in the
literary translation and introduce some typical models for assessing translation

quality in order to provide theoretical orientations for the analysis of the Chapter 6
in the novel „Lady Chatterley‟s Lover‟ including translation theory, literary
translation and translation quality assessment. Several well-known linguistics such
as Nida, Peter Newmark, Koller and J. House with their notable works are presented
in this section.
1.1. Literary translation.
1.1.1. Definition of literary translation
Among other types of translation, literary translation seems to be discussed
at greatest length due to its special features, that is, it implies the translation of all
genres of literature, which include prose, drama and poetry. As affirmed by Bush
(1998:127), “literary translation is the work of literary translators. That is truism
which has to serve as a starting point for a description of literary translation, and
original subjective activity at the center of a complex network of social and cultural
practices. The imaginative, intellectual and intuitive writing of the translator must
not be lost to the disembodied abstraction which is often described as
“translation”. With this definition, Bush put a stress on the mission of a „literary
translator‟ as well as the social and cultural factors.
Following Bush‟s idea of literary translation, Lambers (1998:130) also
asserted that “a published translation is the fruit of a substantial creative effort by
the translator, who is the key agent in the subjective activity and social practice of

4

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


translation”. He claims that it is the literary translator who decides to translate and
gives the literary translation its existence no matter what restraints of the network of
social and cultural factors are. Literary translation, indeed, is a matter of challenges.
In order to emphasize its difficulties, Johnson (1999:1) presented it as 'an

apparently nebulous body of knowledge in oral or written form, an imitation of life,
which reflects civilization and culture, and which covers every angle of human
activities-culture, tradition, entertainment, information among others. Sharing the
same view with other predecessors, John Bester (quoted by Landers, 2011: 10)
claimed that literary translation is "an art of the possible; compromise is inevitable
and universal”. However, this art also emphasizes aspect of equivalence between
source text and target text in literary translation “the translation of texts which are
regarded as “literary” in the source culture and the translation of a text (in
principle, at least, any text) in a way that the product be acceptable as “literary” to
the recipient culture”, as affirmed by Toury (1993).
In general, literary translation is considered as one of the great creative and
universal means of communicating the emotional, spiritual and intellectual concerns
of humankind. Consequently, it may be said to have the greatest number of peculiar
problems including cultural, linguistic, stylistic factors and the text itself, which will
be discussed in the next section.
1.1.2. Difficulties in literary translation
Since every language portrays the world in diverse way and has its own
grammar structure, grammar rules and syntax variance, literary translation involves
challenges for both inexperienced and experienced translators. This section,
therefore, is designed to discover prominent difficulties that translators tend to cope
with literary translation as “when there is any kind of translation problem, literary
translation is normally (not always) out of the question” (Newmark, 1988:70).
The difficulty in translation, indeed, just lies in the fact that both the content and the
style are already existent in the original and as a result, the translator must
reproduce them as they are in quite a different language.
5

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add

Obviously, literary translation is a challenging activity and there are already
a great number of difficulties that emerge throughout the translation process.
According to Christiane Nord (1997), a translator might experience translation
difficulties if he lacks the skilled required for a certain translation job. No matter
how good and experienced he is, he is likely to encounter obstacles when translating
two different languages. To illustrate this viewpoint, he formulated a model in
which he divides different translation problems into four sub-types, namely,
cultural, stylistic, linguistic and text-specific problems, which will be briefly
discussed in the following sections.
1.1.2.1. Cultural translation problems
Undeniably, culture is also a major concern of literary translation. As a
result, cultural translation problems refer to the differences in „conventions (norms)
and habits‟ (Schjoldager, 2008) between ST culture and TT culture. One particular
genre is set up and written in a certain way in the ST culture but may have to be
different if the TT conventions are not the same in that specific genre. Certainly,
culture is a key role that enables one to understand a literary work, which is quite a
relatively difficult issue to handle even in the SL, not that of TT. It leads to a
requirement of the translator‟s understanding of the beliefs, values, attitudes of the
SL so that he can successfully transmit it to people of different sets of beliefs,
attitudes and values. It might be drawn that the closer the two cultures are, the less
challenging the work of translator seems.
In terms of the relationship between receptors and translators, Larson
(1984:436) develops the idea that “The receptor audience will decode the
translation in terms of his own culture and experience not in terms of the culture
and experience of the author and audience of the original document. The translator
then must help the receptor audience understand the content and intent of the
source document by translating with both cultures in minds”. Consequently, it is not
an easy task to transplant a text steeped in one culture into another, especially it
possesses its own metaphors and allusions.
6

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


1.2.2.2. Stylistic translation problems
Another factor challenging translators belongs to stylistic feature, caused in
rendering the style in which a ST is written. According to Landers, “style” is an
“oxymoron” to a translator. In order to perform his or her task well, it would be
suggested that the translator strives to have no style at all and disappears into and
become “indistinguishable from the style of SL author”. Preferably, translator
should adapt to the style of each author translated but always as faithful to the
original as much as possible. In narrow sense, style can be understood as the way
one says a thing or the way something is written as distinct from its subject matter.
1.2.2.3. Linguistic translation problems
The third challenge is linguistic translation problem, which is derived from
structural differences between the source language and the target language. (Nord,
1997). Linguistically, each language possesses its own metaphysics which
determines the spirit of a nation and its behavioral norms. It rejects the commonly
held belief that all people of different countries have a common logical structure
when processing with language independent of communication. Instead, it
emphasizes the influences of linguistic patterns on the way people perceive the
world. Consequently, the modes of thinking and perceiving in groups utilizing
different linguistics systems will result in basically different world views. Since
words or images may vary considerably from one group to another, the translator
need to pay attention to the style, language and vocabulary peculiar to the two
languages in question in order to produce an „exact‟ translation of the source
language text.
1.2.2.4. Text specific translation problems
The last problematic issue involves text feature. As the name indicates, textspecific translation problems are specific for this one text. The aforementioned
elements prove to be bound to this specific ST. In order to successfully translate the

7

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


ST, the translator must know that they are and what they refer to after reading the
entire novel.
Consequently, it is vital to suggest an effective solution which satisfactorily
answers all the aforementioned challenges. Despite various ways of solving these
problems, Schjoldager‟s concept is shortly noted with three questions for translator
as follows:
 While translating, are you expected to focus on the form and content
of the ST or on the effect of the TT?
 Are you expected to act as a communicator of somebody else‟s
communication or as a mediator between primary parties?
 Is your translation to appear as an overt translation or as a covert one?
(Schjoldager, 2008).
Answering these questions will help the translator decide whether to choose
a ST oriented strategy or a TT oriented strategy. While the former one mainly focus
on ST form and content with the preference an overt translation , the latter one put a
stress on the effect of the TT with the emphasis on covert translation.
1.2. Translation quality assessment
1.2.1. The role of translation quality assessment
As mentioned earlier, translation quality assessment plays important role in
linguistic field. Newmark (1995) regards translation criticism or translation quality
assessment (TQA) as a crucial link between translation theory and its practice and
as “the keystone of any course in comparative literature, or literature in translation,
and a component of any professional translation course with the appropriate texttypes as an exercise for criticism and discussion”. In his work, “A textbook of
translation” (1995), Newmark affirms that quality assessment in translation could

be considered a very crucial and useful tool for translators which could perfect their
competence as well as gain more essential professional experiences. Secondly, TQA

8

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


could help translators expand their knowledge and understanding of linguistics
regarding either their mother tongues and the foreign language or topics discussed
in the translation. Ultimately, this activity offers a good chance for translators to,
first, re-organize their knowledge of translation in terms of translation principles
and then, to sharpen their comprehension of translation theories which are
extremely important for professional translators.
1.2.2. Approaches towards translation quality assessment
It has long been discussed that the aim of each translation activity is to
produce a good translation, a good TT. However, what criteria should be based on
to say that one TT is a „good‟ translation while another is „bad‟ or „poor‟ still
remains a challenging question to answer. Schaffner (1997) states that the criteria
listed are supposed to be different regarding the purpose of the assessment and on
the theoretical framework which the people in charge of assessing translation
quality apply. House (1997) also agrees that „different views of translation lead to
different concepts of translation quality, and hence different ways of assessing it‟.
The answer to what a good translation is still remains controversies. A large
majority of studies on this issue, in fact, has been conducted. House (1986)
classifies the studies into four main categories: pre-linguistic studies, responsedbased psycholinguistic studies, source text-based studies, and studies based on
pragmatic theories of language use.
Undertaken by professional translators, philologists, and poets on the subject
of translation and translation quality, pre-linguistics studies put emphasis on such
criteria including the faithfulness to the ST and the preservation of the ST‟s

„specific flavor‟ (House, 1986). These criteria may seem valid but rather vague and
impractical, as asserted by Cicero, „a translation should be free…. A translation
should be literal”.
Meanwhile, advocates of the second group consider a good translation one
which accomplishes the purpose of the ST but in target language (Forster, 1958).
The leading representative for this approach is Nida with the „dynamic equivalence

9

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


principle‟. According to him (1964), the response of TT receptors should be similar
to that of ST audience. The question, however, is whether this criterion can be
tested or not it would remain „mentalistic and needs further definition‟ (Newmark,
1974). Though many experimental studies conducted by Nida and Taber (1969),
Miller and Beebe-Center (1958), and later Carroll (1966) suggested different tests
and standard to produce concrete quality statements, a score of drawbacks of the
tests were recognized and thoroughly explained by House.
The third group consists of researchers who use the ST as the basis to
evaluate a translation text. A consistent model including criteria for the
comprehensive description and explanation of the ST and for the evaluation of the
TT should be built to overcome shortcomings of previous studies on TQA (Wilss,
1974). Supporting Wilss‟s concept, Reiss (1973) also shares a common idea that
quality of a translation can be determined on the basis of the ST, more specifically,
its function and type. The suggested models are potentially useful, however, lack of
concrete ideas to be effectively applied.
The last group of studies represented by House (1986) proposes a model of
translation quality assessment based on pragmatic theories of language use. Given
clear and comprehensive linguistic theories as the foundation and specific steps, the

model is built to overcome the inadequacies of previous models. Yet, it should be
noted that the model requires translation critics to reach a certain level of both
linguistic knowledge and professional skills to apply, which makes it difficult to be
widely used.
In his book, Newmark (1995) also suggests another method to evaluate a
translation text which is a “comprehensive criticism of a translation‟. This method
including five main steps is actually a summary by Newmark of the process that any
translator must experience when translating a text. Despite the weakness regarding
theoretical ground in comparison with House‟s model, Newmark‟s model seems to
be an effective tool with a wider application.

10

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


1.2.3. Previous models for translation quality assessment
1.2.3.1. Nida‟s response-based approach
Before Nida, most scholars writing about translation applied a particular
linguistic approach to the topic, taking translation to be a type of applied linguistics.
In favor of systematic approach to translation, Nida (1964) suggested three criteria
to assess quality of a translation which are programmatic and general: general
efficiency of the communication process; comprehension of intent; equivalence of
response. The third and most important criterion is, of course, closely to Nida‟s
well-known basic principle of “Dynamic (or Functional) Equivalence of a
translation”; the manner in which receptors of the translation text responds to the
translation text must be equivalent to the manner in which the receptors of the
source text respond to the source texts. Nida and Taber (1969:173) also provides
three similar criteria: the correctness with which the receptors understand the
message of the original, the ease of comprehension and the involvement a person

experiences as a result of the adequacy of the form of the translation. Again, these
behavioral criteria need to be further explained and put to the practical tests.
1.2.3.2. Koller‟s text-based approach
Koller (1974) acknowledges the importance of a linguistic model of translation
quality assessment with three steps. The first step is to consider the transferability of
the original text. If the original text is transferable, it tends to achieve the most
equivalent translation. If the original text is untransferable, there would be no
equivalence or no translation is made. The source text should be remained the same.
The second step is to re-translate the target into the source language. A translation is
acceptable if the target text is similar in meaning with the source text after it is retranslated. The following step is to have the translation „proof-read by native
speakers of the target language‟. A translation must satisfy readers as native
speakers of the target language. It means that they are able to interpret the
translation without challenges.

11

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


In general, in spite of its strengths, Koller‟s model seemingly does not go
beyond a very general outline with no suggestions for application. Criteria that the
transferability of a text based have not been mentioned in his model. Moreover, the
approach might not offer a specific method so that it might not be applied in a real
translation. Thus, it needs to be further developed and made more concrete in order
to form a workable model of TQA.
1.2.3.3. Peter Newmark‟s comprehensive criticism approach
According to Peter Newmark, translation criticism is an essential component in
a translation course. He suggests three reasons in order to explain for this idea.
First, it considerably improves your competence as a translator. Second, it expands
your knowledge and understanding of your own and foreign language, as well as

perhaps of the topic. Thirdly, it will help you to sort out your ideas about
translation. As an academic discipline, translation criticism ought to be the keystone
of any course in comparative literature, or literature in translation, and a component
of any professional translation course with the appropriate text-type as an exercise
for criticism and discussion.
According to Peter Newmark, a comprehensive criticism should cover five
topics to criticize a text:
1. A brief analysis of the SL text stressing its intention and its functional aspects
2. The translator‟s interpretation of the SL text‟s purpose, his translation
method and the translation‟s likely readership.
3. A selective but representative detailed comparison of the translation with the
original
4. An evaluation of the translation: in the translation‟s terms and in the critic‟s
terms
5. An assessment of the likely place of the translation in the target language
culture or discipline.

12

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


Despite its prominence among those previous models, this model seems hard to
apply as it mainly relies on the translator‟s experience. Consequently, it is likely to
be ineffective for inexperienced translators.
In short, in spite of their strength, the three first models still experience
limitations. In Nida and Taber‟s model, all the tests and criteria suggested by these
two theorists seem unfruitful. This might be explained by the limitation of
intelligibility and lack of reference to the ST. Although Koller‟s model turned out to
be more appropriate, emphasizing on the necessity of developing a comprehensive,

linguistic model of translation, he seems not to go beyond a very general outline
without further implications. Concerning Peter Newmark‟s notion, all five topics to
criticize a text are clearly stated but rely on translator‟s experience. As a result, this
model is inclined to challenge new translators. Meanwhile, House‟s model, based
on semantic, pragmatic and textual aspect, is considered the most appropriate one to
assess translation quality.
1.3. House’s model of translation quality assessment
Unlike other theorists, Juliane House put a stress on semantic and pragmatic
equivalence and argues that ST and TT should match one another in function. She
suggests that it is possible to characterize the function of a text by determining the
situational dimensions of the ST. More specifically, every text itself is placed within
a particular situation which has to be correctly identified and taken into account by
the translator. If the ST and the TT differ substantially on situational features, then
they are not functionally equivalent, and the translation is not of a high quality. In
fact, she claims that a translation text should not only match its source text in
function, but employ equivalent situational-dimensional means to achieve that
function.
1.3.1. House’ original model
Juliane House gives a model for TQA which is based on pragmatic theories of
language. This model attempts to avoid anecdotalism, reductionism, programmatic
statements and intuitively implausible one-sided considerations of the ST and TT

13

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


alone. In this model, there is an analysis of linguistic-situational particularities of
the source and target texts, a comparison of the two texts, and an assessment of their
relative match. The basic requirement for equivalence is that the translation should

have a function which is equivalent to that of the original, and should also employ
equivalent pragmatic means for achieving that function. An initial analysis of the
original according to a set of situational dimensions for which linguistics correlates
are established will be made. Then, there will be a comparison between the original
and the translation in terms of textual profiles and functions. In this comparison,
some mismatches are likely to occur, namely, dimensional mismatches and nondimensional mismatches.
In order to do so, each text must be analyzed individually for establishment of
corresponding textual function, which was defined by House as "the use of the text
in a particular situation" (House, 1977: 38). This situation bound the text and for
the purpose of analysis, it was broken down into specific situational dimensions,
which are presented in her model as follows:
A. Dimensions of Language User

1. Geographical Origin
2. Social Class
3. Time

B. Dimensions of Language Use

1. Medium: simple/complex
2. Participation: simple/complex
3. Social Role Relationship
4. Social Attitude
5. Province

Figure 1: A model for translation quality assessment by House (1977)
The theoretical framework for above scheme was Crystal and Davy (1969)'s
model, of which most of dimensions were adopted by House, those of Time,
Medium, Participation and Province.
The next step, according to House, is to figure out how above situational

dimensions "are realized syntactically, lexically and textually" (House, 1977:51).

14

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


To do so, analyzer shall, in each dimension, pick up syntactic, lexical and textual
means which are "text-specific linguistic correlates to the situational dimensions"
(House, 1977:52). The basis for those linguistic correlates were taken by House
(1977: 51-61) from linguistic theories such as grammatical models of Quirk and
Greenbaum (1973), treatment of the textual means based on Enkvit (1973), themerheme distribution of Prague school, types of text constitution of Söll (1974),
illocutionary forces. What are found will lead researcher to statement of in ST's
function composed by ideational and interpersonal textual components, two terms
are adopted from Halliday (1970, 1971, 1973).
It might be concluded that the main purpose of House‟s model is to analyze the
SL text and TL text according to given situational dimensions of the model to get
the respective textual profiles, and that of SL text will be further used as norm to
judge the appropriateness of the TL text (House, 1997: 52). The secondary objective
is to identify the possible mismatches between the original and translation. The
above mentioned detailed comparison of text by situational dimension helps to
reveal possible mismatches, and such mismatches were named covertly erroneous
errors. This type of error, on the other hand, suggests another type: overtly
erroneous error, which is used to name the mismatches in denotative meaning or
breaches of TL system. More specifically, over translation is "one in which the TT
addressees are quite "overtly" not being directly addressed”; thus an overt
translation is one which must overtly be a translation, not, as it were, a "second
original" (House, 1977: 189) and covert translation is "a translation which enjoys
or enjoyed the status of an original ST in the target culture" (House, 1977:194).
House's notion of overt and covert translation, according to Munday (2008:93), is

"rather confusing" and the difference between them "is cline rather than a binary
opposite" (2008: 94).

To distinguish, House clarified "the ST of overt/covert

translation is respectively tied/ not tied to source language community and culture"
(1977: 189,194). As a result, ST of covert translation is tied to expectation of the
target culture addressee while that of overt translation is less likely to be so. This

15

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add


leads to the definition of cultural filter – a concept suggested by House as "a means
of capturing socio-cultural differences in shared conventions of behavior and
communication, preferred rhetorical styles and expectation norms in the two speech
communities" – must be applied to covert translation. Such application challenges
either translator or evaluator by demanding a considerable consideration of cultural
presuppositions of both SL's community and TL's community, i.e., the translator
must, in House's words, "view the ST through glasses of target culture member"
(1977: 196, 197).
1.3.2. House’s revised translation quality assessment model
House‟s original model attracted numerous comments and criticisms, which led
to her further refinement in 1997. The most controversial issue in her model,
according to many critics, is the overlapping of data while analyzing the text by
dimension.
In her revised model, House added the new category of Genre in order to
provide more comprehensive analysis for text profile. Genre here is defined as „a
socially established category characterized in terms of occurrence of use, source

and a communicative purpose or any combination of these‟ (House, 1997). Genre,
Register and Language correlates to each other. According to House, Genre serves
as a bridge connecting Register and Function. In general, the application of her
revised model enables researchers to examine a text on different levels: Function,
Register and Language, which are illustrated as bellow:
INDIVIDUAL TEXTUAL FUNCTION

REGISTER

FIELD
Subject matter and
social action

GENRE

TENOR
Participant relationship
- Author‟s provenance and
stance
- Social role relationship
- Social attitude




MODE
Medium
(simple/complex)
Participation
(simple/complex)

16
LANGUAGE/TEXT

LUAN VAN CHAT LUONG download : add