Ngoại lai hóa và bản địa hóa các yếu tố đặc thù văn hóa trong hai bản dịch anh việt “gió qua rặng liễu” và “gió đùa trong liễu”

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

VƯƠNG THU HẰNG

FOREIGNIZATION AND DOMESTICATION OF CULTURE-SPECIFIC
ITEMS IN TWO VIETNAMESE TRANSLATIONS OF THE ENGLISH
NOVEL “THE WIND IN THE WILLOWS”
(Ngoại lai hóa và bản địa hóa các yếu tố đặc thù văn hóa trong hai bản dịch
Anh-Việt “Gió qua rặng liễu” và “Gió đùa trong liễu”)

M.A. MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201.01

HÀ NỘI - 2020


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

VƯƠNG THU HẰNG

FOREIGNIZATION AND DOMESTICATION OF CULTURE-SPECIFIC
ITEMS IN TWO VIETNAMESE TRANSLATIONS OF THE ENGLISH
NOVEL “THE WIND IN THE WILLOWS”
(Ngoại lai hóa và bản địa hóa các yếu tố đặc thù văn hóa trong hai bản dịch
Anh-Việt “Gió qua rặng liễu” và “Gió đùa trong liễu”)

M.A. MAJOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201.01
Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lê Hùng Tiến

HÀ NỘI - 2020


DECLARATION
I hereby state that the major programme thesis entitled “Foreignization and
Domestication of Culture-specific Items in Two Vietnamese Translations of the
English Novel “The Wind in the Willows”” has been conducted and submitted in
partial of fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts at the Faculty
of Postgraduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam
National University, Hanoi. I confirm that this submission is my own work and has not
been submitted for any other degree, and all the references to other works mentioned in
the paper have been cited properly, to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Vương Thu Hằng
Hà Nội, June 2020

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the first place, I would like to express my sincere thanks for the Translation
and Interpreting Division, Faculty of English Language Teacher Education, University
of Languages and International Studies, VNU Hanoi for providing me with an
advantageous environment to gain useful knowledge and access materials about

translation studies.
Next, I feel profoundly grateful to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lê Hùng Tiến,
for his enthusiastic support and encouragement that helped me surmount difficulties.
Without his valuable contributive advice, this study could not have been completed.
Besides, my heartfelt thanks are given to my classmates from class QH2016D1
for standing by my side and urging me on throughout the research period. I genuinely
appreciate their support and constant encouragement.
Also, I am much obliged to other fellow friends of mine. Thanks to their positive
suggestions and encouragement, I could possibly gain great inspirations. Their provision
of rare and precious reference materials was real help to me.
Ultimately, I am deeply indebted to my husband and my whole family for their
wholehearted support. Thanks to them, I could maintain high motivation and study in
favorable conditions.

ii


ABSTRACT
This research investigates the translation strategies and procedures applied to
treat culture-specific items appearing in “The wind in the willows” by Kenneth Grahame
in its Vietnamese translations “Gió qua rặng liễu” by Nguyên Tâm (2006) and “Gió đùa
trong liễu” by Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Linh (2017). To fulfil this aim, the mixed method is
adopted in this study. The qualitative method and quantitative calculations are used to
process 171 culture-specific items identified from the 12 chapters of the source text and
their translations in the target texts. Based on the taxonomy of culture-specific items
synthesized from different works, especially Espindola (2005) and the taxonomy of
domesticating and foreignizing procedures following Aixelá (2016), the study compares
and contrasts the culture-specific items in the source text with those in the target texts
and between the target texts themselves and describes the phenomenon of translation
practices with culture-specific items. As a result, among 14 types of culture-specific

items, food and drink, toponyms and ecology are the largest groups. Next, foreignization
is more prevailing than domestication to treat 171 culture-specific items in both of the
translations. Intratextual gloss and linguistic (non-cultural) translation are the most
dominant foreignizing procedures, and deletion and absolute universalization are the
most dominant domesticating procedures. The procedures used to treat each type of
culture-specific items are also identified. Most of food and drink items are foreignized
through linguistic (non-cultural) translation and intratextual gloss. Toponyms are
frequently foreignized through repetition and extratextual gloss. Ecological items are
mainly foreignized through linguistic (non-cultural) translation.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ iv
LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND ABBREVIATIONS ...................................... vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
1.1. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study .......................................... 1
1.2. Aims and objectives of the study ......................................................................... 4
1.3. Scope of the study ................................................................................................ 4
1.4. Organization ......................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................... 7
2.1. Culture-specific items........................................................................................... 7
2.1.1. Definition of culture-specific items.................................................................. 7
2.1.2. Categorization of culture-specific items .......................................................... 8
2.1.2.1. Klingberg (1986) ..................................................................................... 8
2.1.2.2. Newmark (1988) .................................................................................... 11

2.1.2.3. Stempleski and Tomalin (1993) ............................................................ 14
2.1.2.4. Aixelá (1996) ......................................................................................... 15
2.1.2.5. Davies (2003) ........................................................................................ 16
2.1.2.6. Other theoretical frameworks of CSIs in the 21st century ..................... 17
2.1.2.7. Taxonomy of culture-specific items adopted in this research ............... 19
2.2. Domestication and foreignization ...................................................................... 21
2.2.1. Concepts of domestication and foreignization ............................................... 21
2.2.2. Local procedures of domestication and foreignization of CSIs ..................... 23
2.2.2.1. Vinay and Darbelnet (1958) .................................................................. 23
2.2.2.2. Aixelá (1996) ......................................................................................... 25

iv


2.2.2.3. Hervey and Higgins (1992) ................................................................... 29
2.2.2.4. Bastin (in Baker, 1998).......................................................................... 32
2.2.2.5. Laviosa and Braithwaite (1998) ............................................................ 33
2.2.2.6. Harvey (2000) ........................................................................................ 36
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 40
3.1. Research method ................................................................................................ 40
3.2. Research corpus .................................................................................................. 41
3.3. Procedure of data collection ............................................................................... 42
3.4. Procedure of data analysis .................................................................................. 44
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................ 47
Answer to research question 1: To what extent are the culture-specific items
domesticated and foreignized in the two Vietnamese translations “Gió qua rặng liễu”
by Nguyên Tâm and “Gió đùa trong liễu” by Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Linh? ................... 48
Answer to research question 2: Which domestication and foreignization-oriented
procedures are the most dominant as the treatment of all the culture-specific items in
general and for each type of culture-specific items in particular? ........................... 61

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION .................................................................................. 77
5.1. Recapitulation ..................................................................................................... 77
5.2. Implications ........................................................................................................ 80
5.3. Limitations......................................................................................................... 83
5.4. Suggestions for further research ........................................................................ 84
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................... 86
APPENDIX 1 .................................................................................................................. I
APPENDIX 2 ...........................................................................................................XVII

v


LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND ABBREVIATIONS
List of abbreviations
CSIs: Culture-specific items
SC: Source culture
SL: Source language
ST: Source text
TC: Target culture
TL: Target language
TT: Target text
TT1: “Gió qua rặng liễu” translated by Nguyên Tâm (2006)
TT2: “Gió đùa trong liễu” translated by Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Linh (2017)
List of tables
Page
Table 1.1: Taxonomy of culture-specific items by Aixelá (1996)

15

Table 1.2: Taxonomies of culture-specific items in the 21st century

18

Table 1.3: Taxonomy of culture-specific items synthesized in this
research

20

Table 4.1: Frequency and percentage of the overall strategies of
domestication and foreignization applied in “Gió qua
rặng liễu” and “Gió đùa trong liễu”

55

Table 4.2: Frequency of domestication and foreignization for each
type of CSIs

58

Table 4.3: Frequency of domestication and foreignization-oriented
procedures

62

Table 4.4: Frequency of foreignization and domestication-oriented
procedures for each type of CSIs

vi

66

List of figures
Page
Figure 1.1: Newmark’s taxonomy of culture-specific items (1988)

12

Figure 1.2: Taxonomy of culture-specific items by Stempleski and
Tomalin (1993)

15

Figure 1.3: Taxonomy of culture-specific items by Davies (2003)

17

Figure 2.1: Aixelá’s taxonomy of domestication and foreignizationoriented procedures (1996)

26

Figure 2.2: Hervey and Higgins’s taxonomy of foreignization and
domestication procedures (1992)

30

Figure 2.3: Taxonomy of domestication and foreignization-oriented
procedures adopted in this research based on the
framework by Aixelá (1996)

38

Figure 4.1: Percentage of the types of culture-specific items collected
from “The wind in the willows”

49

Figure 4.2: Percentage of foreignization and domestication-oriented
procedures used to treat the CSIs

63

Figure 4.3: Percentage of foreignization and domestication-oriented
procedures applied to treat toponyms

67

Figure 4.4: Percentage of foreignization and domestication-oriented
procedures applied to treat CSIs about food and drink

71

Figure 4.5: Percentage of foreignization and domestication-oriented
procedures applied to treat ecological CSIs

vii

73

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
This chapter makes the statement of the research problem and gives the rationale
of the study. Besides, it presents the aims and objectives of the study, its significance
and its organization.

1.1. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study
In the present era of globalization and integration, translation has become
increasingly significant in various areas in countries across the world because it is
necessary for people to overcome the language barrier in order to successfully
communicate with one another. Translation has been defined over the past decades.
Among the earliest definitions, the one proposed by Hartman and Stock (1972 - Cited
in Tiến & Bắc, 2008) said that translation was the substitution of a source language unit
with an equivalent target language unit. Then, Larson (Cited in Tiến & Bắc, 2008)
defined translation as a procedure of three major steps of examining SL factors, grasping
their meaning then and reconstructing it with TL units appropriate for the target culture.
It could be seen that Larson’s definition shows more interest in the naturalness of
translation. In other words, Larson’s approach seems more TL-oriented. Besides,
Munday (2001) considered translation as either “the general subject field, the product
(the text that has been translated) or the process (the act of producing the translation,
otherwise known as translating)” (pp. 4-5). Generally, there have been various
definitions of translation, and each emphasizes different issues in translation. Among
them, there have been discussions about whether translation should be SL-oriented or
TL-oriented. The task of translation has never been easy due to many factors including
complicated cultural and linguistic factors among which are culture-specific items.
Concerning cultural translation, culture-specific items are embedded with very special
connotation; therefore, the successful translation of one “cultural word” has never been
an easy task. To deal with culture-specific words or phrases, there are two basic
strategies proposed by Venuti (1995). Controversy surrounding domestication and
1

foreignization has been lasting for a long time (Yang, 2010). It is partly because this
matter is related to ethic problems in translation. Normally, the translator is supposed to
be faithful to the source text; therefore, culture-specific items are supposed to be
maintained as foreign as they are. Attempts to make them become less strange to the
target readership may involve an omission, an addition or a change. Besides,
foreignization and domestication have their own merits and demerits. For example,
when CSIs are foreignized, the translation may not be easy to understand; however, it
brings the target readership a chance to know the source culture. Meanwhile,
domestication could make it easier for the target readership to reader the translation;
however, the opportunity for them to gain new knowledge about a different culture could
be missed.
Internationally, there have been various studies on the same research problem.
Locally, there is a research gap in existing research. As for the pair of English and
Vietnamese, there has been a shortage of studies conducted in the same way as this
research. Nguyễn Thị Hương (2011) carried out a study named “Foreignization and
domestication in Trinh Lu's Vietnamese translation of “Life of Pi" by Yann”. The study
examined a collection of 33 CSIs adopting the taxonomy of CSIs proposed by Espindola
(2006) and the framework of translation procedures by Kwiencinski (2001) and resulted
in the finding of the dominance of foreignization through the English-Vietnamese
translation. In 2014, Dương Thị Ngọc Anh researched on the domestication and
foreignization in the English-Vietnamese translation of “Let’s pretend this never
happened” by Jim Brenton in her bachelor thesis. The study, combining different
models of CSIs and translation procedures, focused not only on CSIs but also on other
aspects including wordplay and syllables. The result based on the analysis of 45 CSIs
showed a similarity with the finding of the afore-mentioned research by Hương (2011)
that foreignization occurred more frequently than domestication. Apparently, CSIs have
gradually received more attention when in the following year. Lã Thị Hồng Hải (2015)
and Phạm Thị Quỳnh Anh (2015) both carried out studies on them despite their different
2

approaches. Hải (2015) laid more emphasis on CSIs together with idioms and
colloquialisms. Meanwhile, Anh (2015) concentrated on proper names. The former
research applying the theory offered by Venuti (1995) and Aixelá (1997) displayed the
result that most of the time, foreignization was adopted to treat CSIs but domestication
was preferred by the translator to deal with idioms and colloquialisms. This research did
not focus on discussing in detail procedures as the manifestation of domestication and
foreignization. The latter study centered around 109 proper names and disregard other
types of CSIs. The result showed little difference from the previous ones. Accordingly,
foreignization appeared to be dominant. Recently, the prominent study related to the
translation of culture-specific items conducted by Triệu Thu Hằng (2019) discusses the
translation quality assessment rather than the translation strategies, particularly
domestication and foreignization. So far, there have been a considerable quantity of
papers striving to explore the translation of CSIs, especially the domestication and
foreignization strategies international; however, nationally, in Vietnam, this area has not
attracted sufficient attention that it deserves. A certain number of works have been
implemented and showed a resemblance in the dominance of foreignization over
domestication in the treatment of CSIs. Nonetheless, they discover dissimilar aspects of
CSIs using various taxonomies and frameworks. In addition, the size of their data is still
modest. Therefore, no valid generalization has been made about the treatment of CSIs
in English-Vietnamese translation. This current situation sets a reasonable requirement
for further research on this issue.
This research will explore more about this phenomenon in the way of examining
the translator’s application of domestication and foreignization in translation,
specifically translating a children’s novel as a novel written for children will necessarily
use either of the above strategies to deal with culture-specific items for children’s
understanding.

3

1.2. Aims and objectives of the study
The purpose of this research is to describe and explore the manifestation of
domestication and foreignization in the two Vietnamese translations of the English
children’s novel “The wind in the willows” by two translators Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Linh
and Nguyên Tâm. The research does not aim to assess the quality of the translations.
The major aim of the research is to identify the domestication and foreignization of
culture-specific items appears in the novel for children. To compare and contrast the
phenomenon in the two works done by two different translators to figure out the way
they deal with culture-specific items using the strategies, which, together with other and
further research, contributes to the enablement of the suggested approaches to
translating culture-specific items as for the type of literature for children. To reach the
above goals, the study will answer the following questions:
1. To what extent are the culture-specific items domesticated and foreignized in
the two Vietnamese translations “Gió qua rặng liễu” by Nguyên Tâm and “Gió đùa trong
liễu” by Nguyễn Thị Cẩm Linh?
2. Which domestication and foreignization-oriented procedures are the most
dominant as the treatment of all the culture-specific items in general and for each type
of culture-specific items in particular?

1.3. Scope of the study
The study focuses on the field of culture-specific items and their translation
strategies of domestication and foreignization together with local procedures. Its major
aims to discover the overall strategies that translators have used to tackle those culturespecific items in English-Vietnamese translation to check whether foreignization or
domestication is more prevalent. The results can help discover a way to overcome
possible translation difficulties encountered by translators, especially those lacking
experience when dealing with CSIs.

4

The subjects that are used in the research are the whole book “The wind in the
willows” written by Kenneth Grahame and their Vietnamese versions “Gió qua rặng
liễu” translated by Nguyên Tâm (2006) and “Gió đùa trong liễu” translated by Nguyễn
Thị Cẩm Linh (2017). The source text has a total of 12 chapters. It retells a story of main
characters who are animals living in the context of the Great Britain in somewhere
between the Victorian and Edwardian periods. It is said that even though “The wind in
the willows” is a children’s novel, it is suitable for the readers of different ages as well.
In the Introduction of the novel itself written by the publisher Wordsworth Editions, it
is stated that “this one was about animals such as could be loved equally by young and
old” (Grahame, 1993, p. 7). The world of the animals in the story reflects much of the
world of the British people at that time.
The CSIs taken from the ST are mostly at the word or phrase level. Rare cases
are in full sentences. This is partly because this study has adopted a less linguistically
oriented approach, which often focuses on the analysis of syntactic, grammatical and
other linguistic aspects of the CSIs, but a more culturally oriented approach based on
the chosen framework of CSI categorization adapted from different works, particularly
Espindola (2005) and the theory of domestication and foreignization-oriented
procedures proposed by Aixelá (1996). There might be a variety of CSIs in the ST but
only potential CSIs fulfilling the definitions and falling into the adopted taxonomy have
been chosen. Therefore, certain units such as idioms, metaphors, wordplays and so forth
are not the focus of this study.
Based on the research questions which have been raised in the previous part, the
study concentrates on the identification of the types of CSIs and the domestication and
foreignization-oriented overall strategies and local procedures to treat the whole range
of selected CSIs and each type of CSIs. The manner in which and the reason why the
translators have decided to adopt a certain procedure or follow either of the two
strategies are not the goals of this study and are considered as the suggestions for further
study. That means further research could be carried out to clarify how the translators

5


rendered the items or what steps they actually took to translate them and factors
interfering in their translation process.

1.4. Organization
The study has been organized into 5 chapters as following:
Chapter 1 - Introduction consists of the statement of the research problem, the rationale
of the study, the aims and objectives of the study, its significance and organisation.
Chapter 2 - Literature review presents the theoretical background of the study, including
the theory about definition, types and characteristics of English culture-specific items
and the translational theory which focuses on translation definition, culture-specific
term translation difficulties and strategies.
Chapter 3 - Methodology shows and justifies the research methods, specifically research
sampling, data collection and analysis procedures.
Chapter 4 - Results and Discussion presents the research findings which respectively
answer to the research questions.
Chapter 5 - Conclusion summarizes the key results of the study, points out its limitations
and eventually offers suggestions for further research.

6


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
In this chapter, the theoretical background of the study, which includes the
definitions and categories of English culture-specific items and the translational
perspectives which emphasize the translation strategies and local procedures to treat
culture-specific items, is presented. In other words, the typical taxonomies of culturespecific items and translation procedures, which are oriented towards foreignization and
domestication, are displayed, analyzed and synthesized to build the theoretical

frameworks.

2.1. Culture-specific items
In the field of translation, culture-specific items are undeniably important and
interesting. They are so highly concerned that many studies have researched on them in
terms of their definition and categorization. A variety of culture-specific items are
popular in texts, especially literary works. They reflect certain aspects of the native
culture mentioned in the work.

2.1.1. Definition of culture-specific items
When discussing translation and culture in “A textbook of translation” published
in 1988, Peter Newmark agrees that culture is suggestive of “the way of life and its
manifestations that are peculiar to a community that uses a particular language as its
means of expression.” He proposed different concepts about language, which includes
“cultural” and “universal” to help distinguish cultural manifestations. In his viewpoint,
he saw no translation challenge in translating universals. Translation issues would rise
in processing cultural words “unless there is cultural overlap between the source and the
target language (and its readership)” (p. 94). Following his proposal of cultural words
versus universal words, Peter Newmark also expressed his ideas which signifies that
dialect words are not viewed as cultural words if they represent universals rather than
those carrying cultural connotations. Besides, he also touched upon the concept of
7


“cultural focus”, which is “when a speech community focuses its attention on a
particular topic” (p. 94), leading to the development of a multitude of terminology.
Cultural focus usually goes hand in hand with translation challenges due to cultural gap,
which is also called cultural distance between SL and TL. Together with his definition
of cultural words, Newmark also discusses that language is not considered a component
of culture but it contains “all kinds of cultural deposits” from the grammar, ways of

address to the lexis. “The more specific a language becomes for natural phenomena (e.g.,
flora and fauna) the more it becomes embedded in cultural features, and therefore creates
translation problems” (p. 95). Cultural words are detectable because they cannot be
translated directly in a literal way, which cannot transfer the meaning properly, even in
case of cultural customs depicted in ordinary language. Peter Newmark also points out
that cultural objects may consist of “a relatively culture-free generic term or classifier”
and “various additions in different cultures”. In addition, his study also presents the idea
that cultural words are “always less context-bound than ordinary language” (p. 96).
According to Mustafar (2018), regarding their definition, CSIs belong to the
terminology of the ST and are related to the SC. It poses a difficulty to translate them
due to the differences in content, subject matter, system from the TT and TC, which
results in the lack of translation equivalents.

2.1.2. Categorization of culture-specific items
2.1.2.1. Klingberg (1986)
There have been many attempts to define and classify culture-specific items. As
cited in Dukmak (2012), in 1986, Klingberg proposed his thoroughgoing categorization
of cultural references, which is comprised of literary references; foreign language in
the ST; references to mythology and popular belief; historical, religious and
political background; building and home furnishings, food; customs and practices,
play and games; flora and fauna; personal names, titles, names of domestic
animals, names of objects; geographical names; and weight and measures. To be
8


more specific, literary references refer to those about characters and incidents in
literary productions as well as titles of literary writings and other publications. In
addition, they could be loanwords from other languages but not necessarily from the
source language. According to Klingberg, those languages could be either imagined or
unimagined. The familiarity of literary terms and the status of publication titles help the

translator make decision on appropriate translation procedures to deal with them.
Foreign language occurring in the ST should be regarded in this manner as well. The
similarity and dissimilarity of the foreign language happening in the ST to the target
readership should be major factors for the translator to opt for a translation procedure.
Cultural references relevant to mythology and popular belief include
“supernatural beings, concepts, events, and customs” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 70). There are
some special cases which could occur to the cultural references of this kind. These terms
could have equivalents in the TL, or they could convey a unique sense in the SL which
is confusing to the TL readership. In another case, the words could be coined by the ST
writer. Besides, cultural words belong to this type could be unknown to the majority of
people in the TC. They might be familiar ideas to the SL readership but not the TL
readership. Eventually, cultural words of this category could originate from another
language with a form resembling to some extent to the form of the TL terms.
Culture-specific items about historical, religious and political background
pose a translation issue which is closely related to the research objectives of this study
which is about translation strategies of domestication and foreignization due to possible
“different religious faiths and customs” and “difficulties arising from dealing with
political references” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 72). Buildings, home furnishing and food are
of great attraction to readers particularly children. According to Klingberg (Cited in
Dukmak, 2012, p.73), “children are interested in the detailed description of food in
literature” as well as “what children eat and drink in a different culture”. Customs and
practice, play and games of the SC which are foreign to or different from the TC also

9


cause translation challenges, in which the translator possibly needs to think about
suitable translation strategies to treat them properly.
Regarding flora and fauna, translation issues arise when there is no name
referring to trees, flowers, bushes and creatures in the TC. Besides, when the SL names

of plants and animals could make mention of multiple species in the SC. The category
of personal names, titles, names of domestic animals and names of objects received
great concentration from Klingberg. Personal names are subdivided into five smaller
groups. The first group centers around “personal names belonging to everyday
language”, which do not bear any particular meanings such as the names “Andrew,
Matthew, Priscilla and Esme” in Joan G. Robinson's When Mamie Was There (1967)
(Dukmak, 2012, p. 75). Next, it is about “personal names belonging to everyday
language, the meaning of which has been utilized by the author in a way not intelligible
to the readers of the target text” such as “the name “Goodenough” from The Borrowers
Afield (1995) by Mary Norton” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 75). The third type is comprised of
“personal names not belonging to everyday language and with a meaning essential for
the understanding’, which are said not be popular nowadays any longer and could be
illustrated by “Jenny Peace, Dolly Friendly, and Lucy Sly” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 75). In
addition to the three previous subcategories of personal names, the fourth subdivision is
made up of “fictitious personal names with a special melodious ring” as illustrated by
“Mumintrollet, Snorkarna and Snusmumriken from The Finn Family Moomintroll
(1984) by Tove Janson” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 75). Lastly, the other fifth subdivision is
composed of “personal names which are loans from a primary language” (Dukmak,
2012, p. 76). The primary language mentioned here could be either a fictitious primary
language or a real one. A fictious primary language means that the primary language
might originate from a mythical nation such as the name “Zardeenah” in The Horse and
his Boy by C. S. Lewis (Dukmak, 2012, p. 76). With regard to titles, there are familiar
English titles such as “Mr., Mrs., and Miss” and also mythical titles such as “Tisroc’ as
“the title of the ruler of ‘Calormen’ in The Horse and his Boy” (Dukmak, 2012, p. 76).
10


With reference to names of domestic animals, they are supposed to be coped with in the
same manner as personal names. However, in several cases, names of domestic animals
could carry “a descriptive meaning” which might require translation or explanation

(Dukmak, 2012, p. 76). For instance, ““a dog called “Scamp” and a horse called
“Prince”” are the examples of names with descriptive meanings (Dukmak, 2012, p. 76).
Names of objects include names of boats and could bear a particular meaning in them
such as “The Adventure” appearing “in the English Finn Family Moomintroll”
(Dukmak, 2012, p. 77). Another major category in the framework of cultural references
by Klingberg in 1986 is geographical names. As regards geographical names such as
“Thames”, “Fosse Way”, Klingberg’s viewpoint is that their “standard forms” could
exist in the target language or not (p. 77). They could include “a common noun” in them.
In some cases, geographic names could become ambiguous to understand for the target
readership. The final significant category in the framework of cultural references
proposed by Klingberg is weights and measures. Translation matters can arise when
non-metric measures such as “mile” occur in the source texts. For some languages there
is no equivalents for such non-metric measures in the target language. Pertaining to
currency, several foreign currencies could pose translation challenges such as “halfcrown” (p. 78). Unfixed exchange rates are a matter to consider when dealing with
currency translation.

2.1.2.2. Newmark (1988)
Together with his proposed definition of cultural words, Newmark (1988)
suggests the categorization of cultural words into five major groups comprising of
Ecology; Material culture (artefacts); Social culture – work and leisure;
Organisations, customs, activities, procedures, concepts; Gestures and habits.

11


CATEGORIES OF
CULTURAL
WORDS

Ecology

Flora, fauna, winds,
plains, hills

Material culture
(artefacts)

Food, clothes, houses
and towns, transport

Social culture

Work and leisure

Organisations,
customs, activities,
procedures, concepts

Political and
administrative,
religious, artistic

Gestures and habits

Figure 1.1: Newmark’s taxonomy of culture-specific items (1988)

Firstly, as for Ecology, cultural words belonging to this type are geographical features
which “are usually value-free, politically and commercially”, according to the Newmark
(1988, p. . The popularity of ecological words is affected by “the importance of their
country of origin and their degree of specificity”, which could contribute to whether

they could be considered cultural words or not. “The importance, and geographical and
political proximity of their countries” can increase or decrease the familiarity of cultural
local words. Several ecological features can “become more or less a lexical item in the
‘importing’ TL” if they are commercially significant. Furthermore, a couple of
ecological features may not be interpreted “denotatively or figuratively, in translation”
in the places where those ecological features “are irregular or unknown” (Newmark,
1988, pp. 96-97). As proposed by Newmark, “the species of flora and fauna are local
and cultural, and are not translated unless they appear in the SL and TL environment”
(Newmark, 1988, p. 97). When they are used in a technical manner, terms describing
12


“botanical and zoological classifications” could be considered as an international
language. Next, about Material culture (artefacts), Newmark has clarified material
culture into smaller subcategories such as food, clothes, houses, transport and flora and
fauna. Regarding food, according to Newmark (1988), “food is for many the most
sensitive and important expression of national culture” (p. 97). In English, foreign food
terms such as Italian and Greek terms, particularly French words, could appear in
different settings including menus, cookbooks, food guides, tourist brochures,
journalism. Those food terms require the translator to decide appropriate translation
procedures to resolve the translation issue, which is the cultural aspects of those terms.
Clothes are another potential culture-bound case. In English, many words referring to
women’s clothes are French. At the same time there are many national costumes typical
for each country worldwide. They may require the translator to explain for TL readers
or to use generic nouns or some classifiers, or even replace the cultural clothes-relevant
terms. Similar to food and clothes, “many language communities have a typical house
which for general purposes remains untranslated” (Newmark, 1988, p. 98) as well as
different parts of the houses could be cultural words. As for transport, there are many
neologisms, vogue-words as well as anglicisms created by innovations together with
commercialization. In his work, it is also noted that different carriage terms could

produce local color. However, nowadays, many terms related to transport such as cars
and planes are near-internationalisms, probably for the educated laymen. Concerning
the division of social culture, which centers around work and leisure terms, it is
essential to figure out the denotative and connotative meaning of the terms. Several
expressions could pose translation challenges, which are “the connotative difficulties of
words” (Newmark, 1988, p. 98). Terms about working classes could be used for a
particular purpose. As for entertainment, culture-specific items include “national games
with their lexical sets”, several non-team games, card-games or gambling games
(Newmark, 1988, p. 99). About the category of organisations, customs, activities,
procedures, concepts, Newmark (1988) emphasizes terms reflecting the political
13


aspects, social features of a country. This major category contains institutional terms
such as “the title of a head of state”, “the name of a parliament”, government-relevant
terms, ministries, parties, a public body, national organisations, government posts,
political concepts. Terms falling into this category could be historical institutional terms,
international institutional terms, religious terms, artistic terms including “names of
buildings, museums, theatres, opera houses” and so forth (Newmark, 1988, p. 99).
Newmark recommends considering transference or naturalization with description
depending on the educational level of TL readership and the universality of the terms.
The final group of cultural words are associated with gestures and habits. Some
gestures and habits, which are “often described in non-cultural language” exist in several
cultures but not in other ones, or some occur in different cultures with different meanings
(Newmark, 1988, p. 103); therefore, in situations with ambiguity, the translator needs to
distinguish between the description and the function of the gestures and habits,
especially the TL readership and settings for the most satisfactory translation.

2.1.2.3. Stempleski and Tomalin (1993)
From a pedagogical approach to teaching culture, in their work named “Culture

awareness” first published in 1993, Stempleski and Tomalin reviewed “achievement
culture” and “behaviour culture”, which respectively foregrounds “elements of British
and American culture - history, geography, institutions, literature, art and music – and
the way of life” and “culturally-influenced beliefs and perceptions, especially as
expressed through language, but also through cultural behaviours” (p. 6). The
categorization adopted by Stempleski and Tomalin (1993) is manifested through the
diagram below.

14


Products
• Literature,
forklore, art,
music, artefacts

Ideas
• Beliefs,
values,
institutions

Behaviours
• Customs,
habits, dress,
foods, leisure

Figure 1.2: Taxonomy of culture-specific items by Stempleski and Tomalin (1993)

2.1.2.4. Aixelá (1996)
In 1996, Aixelá proposed another theoretical framework of culture-specific

items, which appears to be succinct, from the translator’s perspective. In Aixelá’s
arrangement based on Theo Herman’s differentiation proposed in 1985, culture-specific
items are divided into two fundamental groups, which are proper nouns and common
expressions.

Proper nouns

Conventional names and loaded names

Common expression

Objects, institutions, habits, opinions restricted to culture

Table 1.1: Taxonomy of culture-specific items by Aixelá (1996)

In details, proper names are classified into two categories, which are conventional
names carrying no meaning and loaded names. Conventional names include “important
toponyms, historical fictional or non-fictional names like saints, kings, etc.” (p. 60).

15


Loaded names are literary ones, which “range from faintly “suggestive” to overtly
“expressive” names and nicknames” (p. 59). Loaded names subsume fictional or nonfictional ones connected with history or culture. As regards to the other group of culturespecific items, common expressions incorporate “the world of objects, institutions,
habits and opinions restricted to each culture and that cannot be included in the field of
proper names” (Aixelá, 1996, p. 59). According to Aixelá (1996), culture-specific items
pertaining to this group are of more considerable perplexity with “supratextual, textual
or intratextual factors” (p. 60).

2.1.2.5. Davies (2003)

In her commonly cited work named “A goblin or dirty nose? The treatment of
culture-specific references in translations of the Harry Potter books” published in “The
Translator” in 2003, Eirlys E. Davies proposed her distinction of culture-specific items
in an alternative approach to this translation issue, which shows a wider perspective
(Dukmak, 2012). The culture-specific items in her research gathered from Harry Potter
books were categorized into “networks of culture-specific items” (Dukmak, 2012, p.
79). Davies (as cited in Dukmak 2012) did not cope with culture-specific items singly
but paid more attention to “their global effect of the whole text” (p. 79).

16