(Luận văn thạc sĩ) an evaluation of the vietnamese translated version of the call of the wild by nguyen cung ai and vu tuan phuong m a thesis linguisti

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
******
NGUYỄN THỊ THU HIỀN

AN EVALUATION OF THE VIETNAMESE TRANSLATED
VERSION OF “THE CALL OF THE WILD” BY Nguyen
cung ai and vu tuan phuong
Đánh giá bản dịch tiếng việt của tác phẩm “Tiếng gọi nơi hoang
dã” của hai dịch giả Nguyễn Cung Ái và Vũ Tuấn Phương

MINOR M.A THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15

Hanoi - 2012


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES
******
NGUYỄN THỊ THU HIỀN

AN EVALUATION OF THE VIETNAMESE TRANSLATED
VERSION OF “THE CALL OF THE WILD” BY Nguyen
cung ai and vu tuan phuong
Đánh giá bản dịch tiếng việt của tác phẩm “Tiếng gọi nơi hoang
dã” của dịch giả Nguyễn Cung Ái và Vũ Tuấn Phương

MINOR M.A THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 60 22 15
Supervisor: Pham Thi Thanh Thuy (Ph.d)

Hanoi - 2012


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………
Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………
Table of content……………………………………………………………….
List of abbreviations…………………………………………………………..
1

PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rational for the study………………………………………………

2

2. Objective of the study………………………………………………

2

3. Scope and method of the study………………………………………

2

3.1 Scope of the study

2

3.2 Method of the study

3

4. Organization of the study……………………………………………

4

PART II: DEVELOPMENT

5

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

5

1.1 Translation theory……………………………………………………….

5

1.1.1 Definition of translation ………………………………………………..

5

1.1.2 Translation methods and procedures……………………………………

6

iv


1.1.2.1 Translation methods…………………………………………...

6

1.1.2.2 Translation procedures………………………………………...

8

1.1.3 Translation equivalence…………………………………………………

9

1.1.3.1 Definition……………………………………………………...

9

1.1.3.2 Types of translation equivalence………………………………

11

1.2 Contrastive Analysis

12

1.3 Translation assessment/ evaluation…………………………………….

12

1.3.1 Definition………………………………………………………..

13

1.3.2 Translation Quality Assessment Models………………………

14

1.3.2.1 Julianne House and her model…………………………

14

1.3.2.2 Peter Newmark‘s model………………………………..

16

CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION OF NEWMARK’S MODEL FOR 18
TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF CHAPTER 2 OF “THE
CALL OF THE WILD”
2.1 A brief analysis of the Source Language text ………………………

18

2.2 The translator’s purpose……………………………………………

20

2.3 Comparing the translation with the original………………………

20

2.4 An evaluation of the translation……………………………………

23

2.4.1 An evaluation of the translation version in the translator‘s 23

v


terms…………………………………………………………….
2.4.2 An evaluation of the translation version in the critic‘s terms…..

37

2.4.3 An evaluation of the translation version as a piece of writing, 37
independently of its original…………………………………….
2.5 The translation’s future………………………………………….......
PART

3:

DISCUSSION

OF

RESULTS

AND

38

CONCLUSION

REFERENCES……………………………………………………………….. 39
Appendix A. English version of the selected text ……………………………..
Appendix B. Vietnamese version of the selected text…………………………
Appendix C: Evidence quoted from the original and the translated version

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

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

vii


LIST OF DIAGRAMS AND TABLES

Tables and diagrams

Pages

New Mark‘s methods of translation…………………………...

6

House‘s Revised Schema for the Analysis of ST and TT…….

15

Table 1: A selective but representative detailed comparison of the

23

translation with the original
Table 2:Evidences about translators‘ achievements in terms of word

25

choice and expressions.
Table 3: Evidences about translators‘ achievements in terms of using

26

idioms
Table 4: More evidences about translators‘ achievements in terms of

28

word choice and expressions.
Table 5: Mistakes in Vietnamese version in terms of grammar and

33

meaning
Table 6: Mistakes in Vietnamese version in terms of word choice and
meaning

viii

34


PART I: INTRODUCTION
5. Rational for the study
Translation is an issue which attracts more and more attention from many
people all over the world. Nowadays, in the inevitable trend of globalization and
integration, not only the professional translators but also many people working in
different fields such as health care, economy, politics, etc, are concerned about the
quality of translation. However, in fact, to have a high-quality translation version,
especially in the field of literature, is not an easy task and it involves a lot of skills from
the translators. According to the translator Thuy Toan(1993), to have a good translation
version, the translator must not only love his job and literature but also be good at their
mother tongue, know foreign languages, have a thorough knowledge of culture, work
cautiously and be industrious at consulting. From his point of view, it is clear that
translation is a challenging job, which requires the translator both the knowledge of the
language and the background knowledge of the culture which the literary works
belongs to. Sometimes, due to lack of either of these or because of the translator‘s
carelessness, the translated version may not be concise enough. Even more seriously, it

can transfer the wrong message that is attached in the literary works. At present, in
Vietnam, works of literary translations are growing rapidly , even uncontrollably in
quantity for commercial purposes ; however, there has been no popular criterion for a
good and valuable translated version . Besides the successfully -translated masterpieces
such as Wuthering Heights (Đồi gió hú), Harry Porter, Noruwei no mori (Rừng Nauy),
The Centaur in the Garden (Con nhân mã ở trong vườn ), there still exists ones of bad
quality, for example , the Vietnamese version of ―The Da Vinci Code‖

(Mâ ̣t mã Da

Vinci) by translator Đo Thu Ha (Van Hoa-Thong Tin Publisher ,2006). This translation
receives a lot of criticism right from publication because of the mistakes that she
should not have made in terms of vocabulary, grammar and descriptions. For this
reason, the minor thesis would like to focus on the evaluation of one literary translation

1


so that the readers can have better understanding of some models of translation quality
assessment initiated by some famous linguists in the world like Nida and Taber, Peter
Newmark, and J. House, etc.
Within the limitation of the minor thesis, only some of these models will be
introduced, and then, the model of Peter Newmark will be applied in evaluating the
Vietnamese translated version of ―The Call of the Wild‖ by Nguyen Cung Ai and Vu
Tuan Phuong, two great and famous Vietnamese translators to point out both the
strengths and weaknesses of translated texts in comparison with the original. Also, the
author would like to investigate the prominent equivalence types the translator has
achieved in translating this famous masterpiece so that other translators can get some
experiences from them.
6. Objective of the study

This thesis mainly aims at answering the three research questions:
 How good is the Vietnamese version of ―The Call of the Wild‖ according to
Newmark‘s model?
 What are the weaknesses of the translated version?
 What might be some lessons learned from the translation version?
7. Scope and method of the study
3.1 Scope of the study
The masterpiece ―The Call of the Wild‖ includes of seven chapters in total. Due
to the limited time for this study, only Chapter Two of this short story will be chosen as
the typical analysis of the success and the shortcomings of two translators in translating
this masterpiece from English into Vietnamese. The title of this chapter is ―The Law of
Club and Fang‖ and the reason why this chapter is chosen is that the writer has had
access to this chapter since she was a fourth year student. At that time, she had chances
to learn about this chapter in the subject ―English Literature‖, which attracts her a lot.
Moreover, this is a moving chapter about the process in which the dog adapts itself to
2


the new harsh environment and rude owners. Therefore, the writer decides to make a
comparison between the original version and the translated one to see whether the
translators can transship both the connotative and denotative meaning of the source text
into the target text or not.
a. Method of the study
The goal of this study is to evaluate the quality of the translated version of ―The
Call of the Wild‖ by Nguyen Cung Ai and Vu Tuan Phuong. To reach this goal, I
decide to have an insight into various translation quality assessment models by
different authors, among which Peter Newmark‘s model is chosen as the main criteria
for assessing the Vietnamese version of this masterpiece because of its strong points in
terms of application, that is, it is easy to follow. During the assessing process,
Contrastive Analysis approach will be applied to compare and evaluate the translated

version against the original one.
This assessing process will be carried out as follows. First, the original text will
be read thoroughly and comprehensively, then the source text will be compared to its
translation under the framework of NewMark‘s TQA model. According to his model,
there are five main steps towards TQA and the researcher is going to strictly follow
them:
 Step 1: A brief analysis of the SL text stressing its intention and its functional
aspects
 Step 2: the translator‘s interpretation of the SL text‘s purpose, his translation
method and the translation‘s likely readership
 Step 3: A selective but representative detailed comparison of the translation with
the original in terms of both sematics and syntactics
 Step 4: an evaluation of the translation: - (a) in the translator‘s terms, (b) in the
critic‘s terms, (c) as a piece of writing, independently of its original.

3


 Step 5: Where appropriate, an assessment of the likely place of the translation in
the target language culture or discipline.
8. Organization of the study
The study contains three main parts:
Part 1: Introduction
Part 2: Development. This part includes two chapters:
Chapter 1: Literature Review
This part will discuss different basic aspects of translation, which is compulsory
background knowledge for any translation assessor who wishes to evaluate the quality
of translation, including definition of translation, translation methods and procedures,
translation equivalence, and translation assessment.
Chapter 2: Application of Newmark‘s TQA model in evaluating Chapter Two of

―The Call of the wild‖
In this chapter, Newmark‘s five- step TQA model mentioned above will be applied in
assessing the Vietnamese version of chapter 2 in the works ―The Call of the Wild‖ by
Jack London.
Finally, part 3 will deal with the discussion of the results of this study and some
conclusions will be drawn.
The quality of the translation text including both translators‘ strengths and weaknesses,
which are based on the application of the model, will be discussed. Also, some
implications and suggestions will be made for other translators, especially in the field
of literature.

4


PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1 TRANSLATION THEORY
1.1.1 Definition of translation
Translation has a long history and plays an important role in linguistics as Kelly,
L.G- a prominent figure in linguistic circle, once stated ―Without translation, there is
no history of the world‖. However, there have been so many different opinions of what
a translation is that it has become a controversial topic so far. Within the scope of this
thesis, just some famous viewpoints around this topic of some outstanding researchers
will be mentioned to illustrate this.
The first is the definition made by Newmark, a well-known researcher who has
made a great deal of important contributions to the development of translation.
According to him, “Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written
message and statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in
another language‖ (Newmark, 1988a:7). This definition is quite evident and easy to
understand.

Sharing a similar viewpoint, Catford (1965:20) considers translation ―The
replacement of textual material in one language (source language) by an equivalent
textual material in other language (target language)‖.
Along the same line, Hartman and Stork (1972:713) also gave their own
definition of translation. According to them, ―Translation is the replacement of a
representation of a text in one language by a representation of an equivalent text in a
second language.‖
Besides, there were many other authors giving their opinion towards this term‘s
definition such as Marlone (1988) who believes that ―Translation is the expression in
another language (or Target Language) of what has been expressed in another, Source
Language, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalences‖ or Nida, E.A. (1975:33)

5


who claims that: ―Translation consists of producing in the receptor language the
closest natural equivalence to the message of the source language, first in meaning and
second in style‖
From these definitions, it is noticeable that although different authors have
various ways of defining translation, there is one thing in common in their expressions,
that is, they all emphasize the importance of finding the closest equivalence in meaning
by the choice of appropriate target language‘s lexical and grammatical structures,
communication situation, and cultural context.
1.1.2 Translation methods and procedures
To translate a text from a source language to the target language, the translator
must use some translation methods and procedures, sometimes a combination of them.
According to Le Hung Tien (2006), to be successful in evaluating the translation
quality, the critic must have knowledge of the basic matters of translation theory, such
as the nature of translation, translation procedure, translation methods and translation
equivalence, etc. Therefore, it is necessary for us to have some basic background

knowledge about translation methods and procedures that are often used by translators.
1.1.2.1 Translation methods
In terms of translation methods, Newmark (1988) suggests eight methods of translation
as in the diagram below:
SL emphasis

TL emphasis

Word-for-word translation

Adaptation

Literal translation

Free translation

Faithful translation

Idiomatic translation

Semantic translation

Communicative translation

(Newmark, 1988: 45)

6


It is clear from this diagram that the relationship of each method with the source

language and the target language is different. The position of each method (higher to
lower in comparison with the source language or the target language) reflects not only
the distance with the source language and the target language but also the features of
the translation product created by a respective method: whether it is more alike to the
source language or the target language (Le Hung Tien, 2006). For example, word-forword translation method creates the product characterizing the most features of source
language and adaptation give birth to a translation version which is the most alike to
the target language.
Each method can briefly explained by Newmark as follows:
Word-for-word translation: The SL word-order is preserved and words translated singly by
their most common meaning, out of context.
Literal translation: The SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL
equivalents but the lexical words are translated singly, out of context.
Faithful translation: attempts to reproduce the precise contextual meaning of the original
within the constraints of the TL grammatical structures.
Semantic translation: takes more account of the aesthetic value of the SL text than faithful
translation, compromising on ‗meaning‘ where appropriate so that assonance, word-lay or
repetition jars in the finished version. Therefore, it is more flexible, allows for the translator‘s
intuitive empathy with the original.
Adaptation: In adaptation, the themes, characters, plots are preserved, and the SL culture is
converted to the TL culture and the text is rewritten.
Free translation: is usually a paraphrase much longer than the original, a so-called
‗Intralingual translation‘, often prolix and pretentious, and not translation at all.
Idiomatic translation: reproduces the ‗message‘ of the original but tends to distort nuances of
meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms where these do not exist in the original.
Communicative translation: attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the original
in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the
readership.
(Newmark, 1988: 45-7)

7

Among these methods, Newmark put emphasis on two methods, semantic and
communicative translation, because from his viewpoint, ―Only semantic and
communicative translations fulfill the two main aims of translation, which are first,
accuracy and second, economy.‖(Newmark, 1988:47)
Also, in his book ―A textbook of translation‖ (1995), he also mentions other
methods including service translation, plain prose translation, information translation,
cognitive translation, and academic translation.
1.1.2.2 Translation procedures
Turning to translation procedures, there still exist some disagreements about
what name to call this category. Some authors use the term ―procedure‖ while some
others prefer the term ―techniques‖ or ―strategies‖. Whatever it is called, we can
understand them as methods applied by translators when they formulate equivalence
for the purpose of transferring elements of meaning from the source text (ST) to the
target text (TT) (cited by Delisle when which page)
In this thesis, I would like to use the term ―procedure‖ by Newmark (1988). In
fact, different authors have different classifications of translation procedures. However,
in fact, the terms used in their classfications sometimes overlap. Therefore, here the
writer just wants to mention 14 translation procedures proposed by Newmark in his
book ―A textbook of translation‖(1995). They include:
Transference: it is the process of transferring a SL word to a TL text. It includes
transliteration and it is somewhere called "transcription."
Naturalization: it adapts the SL word first to the normal pronunciation, then to the normal
morphology of the TL.
Cultural equivalent: it means replacing a cultural word in the SL with a TL one. however,
"they are not accurate"
Functional equivalent: it requires the use of a culture-neutral word.
Descriptive equivalent: in this procedure the meaning of the SLT is explained in several
words.

8


Componential analysis: it means "comparing an SL word with a TL word which has a similar
meaning but is not an obvious one-to-one equivalent, by demonstrating first their common and
then their differing sense components."
Synonymy: it is a "near TL equivalent." Here economy trumps accuracy.
Through-translation: it is the literal translation of common collocations, names of
organizations and components of compounds. It can also be called: calque or loan translation.
Shifts or transpositions: it involves a change in the grammar from SL to TL, for instance, (i)
change from singular to plural, (ii) the change required when a specific SL structure does not
exist in the TL, (iii) change of an SL verb to a TL word, change of an SL noun group to a TL
noun and so forth.
Modulation: it occurs when the translator reproduces the message of the original text in the
TL text in conformity with the current norms of the TL, since the SL and the TL may appear
dissimilar in terms of perspective.
Recognized translation: it occurs when the translator "normally uses the official or the
generally accepted translation of any institutional term."
Compensation: it occurs when loss of meaning in one part of a sentence is compensated in
another part.
Paraphrase: in this procedure the meaning of the CBT is explained. Here the explanation is
much more detailed than that of descriptive equivalent.
Couplets: it occurs when the translator combines two different procedures.

―A textbook of translation‖(1995)

As can be seen, in this classification, each procedure is distinguished quite
clearly from each other. However, in real situation of translating a text, it is essential to
use a combination of them flexibly.

1.1.3 Translation equivalence
1.1.3.1 Definition
Translation equivalence is the key concept of translation theory and it is also the
main criterion in assessing the quality of a translation. In the past, translation
equivalence was simply defined as the similarities and the differences between two

9


linguistic units of two language systems; however, nowadays, due to the swift
development of linguistics and other related sciences, this definition has become more
and more complicated. As a result, different authors give different concepts towards
this term. Newmark (1995: 48) states: ―The overriding purpose of any translation
should be to achieve „equivalent effect‟, i.e. to produce the same effect (or one as close
as possible) on the readership of translation as was obtained on the readership of the
original‖.
Baker has another way to define this term by pointing out three levels of
translation equivalence basing on the linguistic forms, that is, equivalence at word
level, sentence level and text level. To be more concrete, she explores the notion of
non-equivalence at different levels and in relation to the translation process including
non-equivalence at word level, non-equivalence above word level, grammatical
equivalence, textual equivalence and pragmatic equivalence
Adding to this various list of translation equivalence, Andrew Chesterman
(1989: 100), in "Readings in Translation Theories" describes that there are "various
categories of equivalence that have been proposed in the literature of translation
theory: content equivalence (often also: content invariance), stylistic equivalence,
formal equivalence, functional equivalence, textural equivalence, communicative
equivalence, pragmatic equivalence".
From the view point of Julianne House (1977: 25), meaning equivalence is the
most essential in translation: "The essence of translation lies in the preservation of

'meaning' across two different languages".
As can be seen, ―translation equivalence‖ is still a complex and controversial
concept. Personally, I am in favor of Ivir‘s expression of translation equivalence :
“Equivalence is…relative and not absolute,…it emerges from the context of situation
as defined by the interplay of (many different factors) and has no existence outside that
context, and in particular it is not stipulated in advance by an algorithm for the

10


conversion of linguistic units of L1 into linguistic units of L2” (Ivir, 1996:155). To
have better understanding of this term, it is necessary to have a look at how translation
equivalence is classified into different types.
1.1.3.2 Types of translation equivalence
Similar to the case of ―translation equivalence definition‖, at present, there are
many diverse ways of classifying types of ―translation equivalence‖, among which four
popular classifications can be identified as follows: Quantity-based, form-based,
meaning-based, and function-based equivalence. Basing on quantitative approach
(quantity-based), Munday (2001) suggests five types of translation equivalence: Oneto-one equivalence, one-to-many equivalence, many- to-one equivalence, one-to-partof-one equivalence, nil equivalence. From this categorization, it is noticeable that
Munday mainly focused on the quantity of equivalence rather than meaning
equivalence. Baker (1992) who is in favor of form-based equivalence classifies
translation equivalence into equivalence at word level (number, gender, tense) and
above word level and textual equivalence (equivalence between a SL text and a TL text
in terms of information and cohesion). On the contrary, Nida (1964), who supports
function-based equivalence, distinguishes formal equivalence and dynamic translation
as basic orientations. According to him, formal equivalence is achieved when the SL
and TL words have the closest possible match of form and content and dynamic
equivalence is achieved when the SL and TL words have the same effect on their
effective readers.
As seen above, each author has his/her own reasons for classifying different

types of translation equivalence. However, with respect to three basic factors in
translating: the nature of the message, the purpose of the author and the translator and
the type of audience, the kind of equivalence by Koller(1979) can be considered a
satisfactory approach. Basing on text meaning, Koller (1979) classified equivalence in
translation into five catagories as follows:

11


 Denotative equivalence: the SL and the TL words refer to the same thing in the real world.
 Connotative equivalence: In addition to denotative value, source and target language words
should also produce the same communicative values in the mind of native speakers of the two
languages.
 Text-normative equivalence: The SL and the TL words are used in the same or similar
context in their respective languages.
 Pragmatic equivalence: With readership orientation, the SL and TL words have the same
effect on their respective readers.
 Formal equivalence: In this type of equivalence, source and target language have the same
formal aesthetic features, orthographic or phonological features.
In brief, this classification can be used as basic criteria to assess the equivalence of the
translation version in comparison with the original.

1.2. Contrastive Analysis
As mentioned above, to evaluate the quality of a translation version, it is
necessary to find out any similarities and differences between it and the original.
Because of this, it is essential to understand contrastive analysis. According to James
(1980), the history of contrastive analysis (CA) starts with Lado‘s Linguistics across
cultures (1957). In his book, Lado stated that ―those elements which are similar to the
learner‘s native language will be simple for him, and those elements that are different
will be difficult‖ (Lado, 1957). James also believed that two earlier books on the

linguistic integration of immigrants to the USA- Weinreich (1953) and Haugen (1956)
gave Lado his impetus. James (1980:3) gave a provisional definition of CA as ―CA is a
linguistic enterprise aimed at producing inverted (i.e., contrastive, not comparative)
two-valued typologies (a CA is always concerned with a pair of languages), and
founded on the assumption that languages can be compared‖. He considered CA as
inter-language study and applied linguistics.
In short, contrastive analysis is the systematic study of a pair of languages to
identify their similarities and differences.
1.3 Translation assessment/ evaluation
12


1.3.1 Definition
In fact, this term has many other alternative names such as ―Translation quality
assessment‖ as in the study of Malcolm Williams (2009), or ―Translation criticism‖ in
the book ―A textbook of translation‖ by Newmark(1995) or ―Translation evaluation‖
by Julianne House. Here are some ways of defining this term by some famous
researchers. According to Hatim and Mason, ―The assessment of translator
performance is an activity which, despite being widespread, is under-researched and
under-discussed‖ (Hatim and Mason 1997:199, cited in Williams, 2001). From this
definition, it can be seen that Hatim and Mason have not given a concrete definition of
―translation assessment‖ but mainly emphasize the fact of assessing translation text at
that time and the necessity of paying more attention to assess translation text seriously
and more critically.
Newmark (1995) also gives his own definition, however, similar to Hatim and
Mason, his focus is not really on what translation assessment actually is but rather on
the importance of translation evaluation as followed: "Translation criticism is an
essential link between translation theory and its practice." (Newmark, p184)
Among famous researchers, Malcolm William‘s definition can be said to be
much clearer. He defines the term ―Translation Quality Assessment‖ (TQA) in several

aspects:
― TQA is a type of evaluation‖
―TQA can be quantitative or qualitative: it can be based on mathematical/ statistical
measurement (as in the case of most academic instruments) or on reader response, interviews
and questionnaires (e.g. Nida)‖
―TQA‖ can be diagnostic (determining areas for improvement at the outset of a course of
study), formative (measuring progress and giving feedback during a course of study) or
summative (measuring the results of learning)‖

After all, he comes to a conclusion that ―Whether our focus is on products,
performance or competence, we are essentially trying to determine degrees of

13


goodness when we perform TQA. The approach can be prescriptive, assessing
translation against criteria of aesthetic effect, usability, and intrinsic compliance with
standards of target language correctness and fidelity.”
1.3.2 Translation Quality Assessment Models
There are many different approaches to TQA and TQA models. However, in
this thesis, I just want to mention the latter which will be the direct basis for evaluating
the translated version of the masterpiece ―The Call of the wild‖. The concept ―Models
of TQA‖ is not new because it has been initiated by many authors such as Wilss (1974)
Koller (1974) or Reiss (1974). However, according to Le Hung Tien (2006), the
models suggested by Koller, Wilss and Reiss, in spite of being very potential, lack
concrete steps to be applied in reality. Peter Newmark (1995) and Julianne
House(1997) are two outstanding researchers who create their own models to repair
these shortcomings of the previous authors. Therefore, we will have deeper insight into
their models.
1.3.2.1 Julianne House and her model

In fact, this model was first designed in the mid-seventies (House 1977,
2d.ed.1981) and recently revisited (House 1997). The original functional-pragmatic
model of translation was based on a set of ―situational dimensions‖ including three
dimensions of ―language user‖, which are her/his temporal, geographical and social
provenance and five dimensions of ―language use‖, for instance, on the text‘s topic and
social activity and on the interaction of, and relationship between author and recipients
in terms of social role relationship, social attitude, degree of participant involvement
and orality.‖ (House, 1977)
In the revisited model, she gives a clearer scheme for analyzing and comparing
original and translation texts as follows:

14


Individual textual function

Register

Genre
(

Field
Subject
matter and
social action

Tenor

Mode

(generic purpose)

+ medium
(simple/complex)

Participant relationship
+ author‘s provenance and
stance

+ participation
(simple/complex)

+ social role relationship
+ social attitude

Language/text
A Scheme for Analyzing and Comparing Original and Translation Texts (House, 1997: 108)

In this model, in order to thoroughly categorize a text‘s function and the
language required, House introduces the category Genre. 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‖ (p:107). In general, the
application of her new model enables us to examine a text on four different levels:
Function, Register and Language
According to Le Hung Tien (2006), the model of TQA has a clear linguistically
theoretical base and concrete, detailed steps. However, this model also requires
linguistic knowledge and high occupational skills of the critics and the criticism mainly

15

aims at researching languages and translation. Therefore, this model has not been
applied widely and just at experimental level in translation studies. Therefore, we will
have a look at anther model of TQA by Peter Newmark.
1.3.2.2 Peter Newmark’s model
Newmark (1988) gives his own model of TQA called ―comprehensive criticism
of a translation‖ including five obvious steps:
Step 1: A brief analysis of the SL text stressing its intention and its functional aspects
Step 2: The translator‘s interpretation of the SL text‘s purpose, his translation method and the
translation‘s likely readership
Step 3: A selective but representative detailed comparison of the translation with the original
Step 4: An evaluation of the translation: - (a) in the translator‘s terms, (b) in the critic‘s terms,
(c) assess the translation as a piece of writing, independently of its original.
Step 5: Where appropriate, an assessment of the likely place of the translation in the target
language culture or discipline.

Each step above is also made very clear in his book: ―A textbook of translation‖
(1995).
In the first step, the critic has to try to point out the author‘s purpose of writing
his work, what attitude he takes towards the topic, what type of readers that the literary
work aims at, and finally what type it is.
In the second step, the critic has to review whether the translator has omitted
any section of the original text and whether it affects the message that the author
wishes to express. Moreover, it is important to find out if any text is over-translated
and to what extent the cultural meaning of the original text has been changed or
transferred to the TL culture.
The third step is the heart of the critique. In this step, the critic has to choose the
most selective and representative examples of the achievements and weaknesses of the
translated version in comparison with the original text. Then he has to group them
under general heads such as the title, the structure, or cultural words… After that, it is

16


essential to analyze how the translator has solved the particular problems of the SL
text.
In the fourth step, the critic will evaluate the referential and pragmatic accuracy
of the translation at three levels: first by the translator‘s standards, second by the
critic‘s standards, and last as a piece of writing, independently of its original. In the
first two criteria, besides evaluating the achievements of the translation, the critic has
to find out if there is any semantic deficits in the translation and what are the causes of
this. In the last criteria, he has to assess whether the translated version is written in a
natural manner, that is, neat, elegant and agreeable or not.
In the last step, especially in the case of literary works such as a poem, a story
or a novel, it is essential to assess the work's potential importance within the target
language‘s literature by asking such questions as:―Does it have any influence on the
target language‘s literature and culture?‖ ―If yes, what are the future of this translated
text?‖
Again, according to Le Hung Tien(2006), although this model is not as clear and
well theoretically based as in the case of House‘s model, it has many strong points in
terms of application. This is due to the fact that these steps are initiated from the
practical experiences of the translators. Moreover, it reflects the problems and the
concerns of the translators in the translation process; therefore, it is easy to be carried
out.
For this reason, in this thesis, the writer decides to apply Newmark‘s model in
assessing the quality of the translated version of Chapter Two in ―The Call of the
Wild‖

17

CHAPTER 2: APPLICATION OF NEWMARK’S MODEL FOR
TRANSLATION QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF CHAPTER 2 OF “THE CALL
OF THE WILD”
This chapter will present the application of Newmark‘TQA model to assess the
quality of the target text. To be more specific, a source text profile will be analyzed
basing on five steps which are mentioned above. Step 3 and step 4 will be paid more
attention because they are the most important parts of translation assessment according
to New Mark. Finally, a statement of quality can be drawn from such findings under
New Mark‘s framework.
2.1 Step 1: A brief analysis of the SL text stressing its intention and its functional
aspects
Although ―The Call of the wild‖ is just a short story, it is considered Jack
London‘s most popular work as well as the masterpiece of his so-called ―early period‖.
Written as a frontier story about the gold rush, the story was first published in four
installments in ―The Saturday Evening Post‖. Then in 1903, Macmillan published the
story in book format.
This story tells about the process of returning to primitivism of Buck- a dog,
who lives in comfort on an estate in California but then is kidnapped and shipped to the
Klondyke. He becomes leader of a sledge-team and, after some hair-raising adventures,
finally abandons human civilization and runs wild with the wolves.
Because the main character of this story is Buck- a dog, it is often classified as
children‘s literature; therefore, the primary readership is children. However, because of
the maturity of its subject matter, it is a worth-reading masterpiece for the older
audiences as well. In brief, the readers that this story aims at are people of all ages who
are interested in foreign literature, especially works by Jack London.
During this story, Jack London always keeps an affectionate attitude towards the
animals and he demonstrates a deep understanding of their psychology and behavior.

18