An Initial View of Investigating Roman Jakobson’s Semiotic Theory in Translation
Keywords:
sign translation, semiotics, intralingual translation, Roman JakobsonAbstract
This article introduces a model for bringing semiotics into English-Vietnamese translation research based on Roman Jakobson’s theory. It is a semiotic translation known by the name “cultural translation” or “cultural transposition.” Through the pioneering theory of Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles S. Peirce, it examined the connection between translation studies and semiotics around the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It is Saussure, who is the first of many people not to follow the approach to semiotics, suggesting the role of semiotics as an independent science, exploiting aspects of semiotic thinking, and not relying on structure. This article also mentioned that Charles S. Peirce and Roman Jakobson advocated for and developed the theory of semiotic translation (1959–1969) because of its helpfulness in translation. Therefore, the universal mechanism of semiotics embodies the application of semiotics to translation, and vice versa. Furthermore, Jakobson’s research uncovered many differences between semiological languages. Jakobson devides this form of translation into three types of semiotic translation (tripartite divisions of translation): intralingual translation, interlingual translation, and intersemiotic translation. This article delves into the advantages and disadvantages of this theory, which can greatly aid in translation. For instance, it explains how one can use “another word, more or less synonymous, or resort to circumlocution” in intralingual translation. This article aims to introduce translation professionals or graduate students majoring in translation to the initial concept of semiotic translation which is a helpful solution to the problem of untranslability and translation difficulties compared to traditional methods. It is very important to explore and learn this method to be able to innovate in the English-Vietnamese translation industry and vice versa.
Downloads
References
Tài liệu tham khảo Tiếng Anh
Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Coursebook on Translation (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
Cai, X. (2000). Comparison Between Intra-lingual Translation and Interlingual Translation, Journal of Foreign Languages, 2, 55–61.
Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation: Language and Language Learning (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dusi, N. (2015). Intersemiotic translation: Theories, problems, analysis. Semiotica, 2015(206), 181–205.
Eco, U. (2000). Experiences in Translation. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. Beijing: Central Compilation & Translation Press.
Gentzler, E. (2001). Contemporary Translation Theories. London and New York: Routledge.
Jakobson, R. (1959/1966/2000). On Linguistic Aspects of Translation, in Brower, R. A. (Ed.), On Translation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jakobson, R. (1969). Linguistics and Poetics, in Sebeok, T. (ed.) Style in Language, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 350–77.
Jia, H. (2019). Semiospheric Translation Types Reconsidered from the Translation Semiotics Perspective. Semiotica, 231, 121–145.
Kenny, D. (1998). Equivalence, in Baker, M. (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Koller, W. (1989). Equivalence in Translation Theory, in Chesterman, A. (Ed. & Trans.), Readings in Translation Theory (pp. 99–104). Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura Ab.
Koller, W. (1995). The Concept of Equivalence and The Object of Translation Studies. Target, 7(2), 191–222.
Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C., (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics (2nd Ed.). London: Verso, 56.
Lotman, J., & Grishakova, M. (2009), Culture and Explosion, Vol. 1. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Munday, J. (2008). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
Munday, J. (2009). The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge.
Newmark, P. (1983). Approaches to Translation. The Modern Language Journal, 67(2), 210.
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Hertfordshire: Pearson Education Limited, 133.
Nida, E., & Taber, C. (1982). The Theory and Practice of Translation (2nd ed.). Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Nida, E. A. (1959/1975). Principles of Translating as Exemplified by Bible Translating, in Dil, A. S. (Ed.), Language Structure and Thought: Essays by Eugene A. Nida. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1902). Logic as Semiotic: The Theory of Signs, in Philosophical Writings. Dover Publication.
Peirce, C. S. (1931). The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 1, Hartshorne, C. and Weiss, P. (eds), Vols. 7–8, Burks, A. (ed.), Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Petrilli, S. (2003), The Intersemiotic Character of Translation, in Petrilli, S. (ed.), Translation translation, 41–53. Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi.
Petrilli, S. (2009). Signifying and Understanding: Reading the Works of Victoria Welby and the Signific Movement, Vol. 2. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Petrilli, S. (2010). Translation, Iconicity, and Dialogism, Signergy 9, 367–386.
Ponzio, A. (2000). ‘Presentazione/Presentation’, Athanor: Semiotica, Filosofia, Arte, Letteratura, Anno X, nuova serie (2), 5–7.
Queiroz, J., & Aguiar, D. (2009). Towards a model of intersemiotic translation. The International Journal of the Arts in Society, 4(4), 203–210.
Queiroz, J. and Aquiar, D. (2015). C. S. Peirce and Intersemiotic Translation, in Trifonas, P. P. (ed.), International Handbook of Semiotics, 201–15, Dordrecht: Springer.
Rędzioch-Korkuz, A. (2016), Opera Surtitling as a Special Case of Audiovisual Translation: Towards a Semiotic and Translation Based Framework for Opera Surtitling, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main.
Saussure, F. de (1976). Cours de linguistique générale. Edition critique préparée par T. de Mauro. Paris: Payot.
Snell-Hornby, M. (1988/1995). Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Toury, G. (1986), Translation: A Cultural-semiotic Perspective, in Thomas, A. S. (ed.), Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, 1111–1124. Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Torop, P. (2002). Translation as Translating as Culture. Σημειωτκή-Sign Systems Studies, 30(2), 593–605.
Torop, P. (2007). Methodological Remarks on The Study of Translation and Translating. Semiotica, 163, 347–364.
Torop, P. (2011). History of Translation and Cultural Autotranslation, in Chalvin, A., Lange, A. and Monticelli, D. (eds.), Between Cultures and Texts: Itineraries in Translation History, 21–31. Berlin: Peter Lang GmbH.
Tài liệu tham khảo Tiếng Trung
Từ điển Baike (n.d). Mục từ 绿茶婊. Truy cập ngày 16/05/2024 từ https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E7%BB%BF%E8%8C%B6%E5%A9%8A/609587.
Tài liệu tham khảo Tiếng Việt
Vũ Trọng Phụng. (2024). Số Đỏ, Việt Nam: NXB Văn học, 68.
Khánh Linh. (2021). Thuật Ngữ “Trà Xanh” Đang Gây Bão Mạng Bắt Nguồn Từ Đâu? Truy cập ngày 16/05/2024 từ https://viettimes.vn/thuat-ngu-tra-xanh-dang-gay-bao-mang-bat-nguon-tu-dau-post142258.html
Trần Ngọc Thêm. (2023). Cơ Sở Văn Hóa Việt Nam, Hà Nội: NXB Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội, 30-36.
Vân Huyền. (2022). Tôn Trọng Chính Kiến Của Trẻ: Bản Ngã Từ Giáo Dục. Truy cập ngày 16/05/2024 từ https://giaoducthoidai.vn/ton-trong-chinh-kien-cua-tre-ban-nga-tu-giao-duc-post577218.html
