Chapter One
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The major hypothesis underlying the present study states that
the more a student possesses linguistic and cultural knowledge at the beginning
of a translation course, the better he progresses in the process of translation
learning and the more qualified prospective translator he is. Considerable
amount of available literature is related, either directly or indirectly, to
this issue (Mounin, 1976; Pym, 2002; Gouadec, 2000; Gambier, 2000; Hardane,
2000).
The literature review, in its three first parts, directs
attention to the actual objectives of translation course in the light of some
central issues to translation. These central issues are the linguistic and the
cultural knowledge the profession requires, the nature of translation
competence
as opposed to linguistic competence and some aspects of
translation's problems and responsibilities.
The fourth part of the literature review proposes a brief
account of the policies some European and Canadian translation schools adopt in
student admission process. Moreover, it exposes the views of some translation
teachers and scholars concerning the selection question. This description aims
to support what our study advances and recommends.
The fifth part of the review deals with measuring translation
learning progress. As stated earlier, this study intends to evaluate
translation competence of third year translation students. Hence, an evaluation
of their level is needed. This is why a critical description of some of the
available evaluation methods of student translations and Translation Competence
measuring instruments is presented.
1.1. Linguistic and Cultural Knowledge
1.1.1. Translation and Language
Translation can be considered as an attempt to fulfil an act
of communication between two linguistic and cultural communities. The
difference between languages is basically the raison d'être of
translation. This section looks at this difference in order to gain some
insight into the
linguistic task of the translator, and hence, the type and amount
of linguistic knowledge he needs to possess.
1.1.1.1. Differences between languages
Instead of discussing the obvious superficial differences that
exist between languages and that no one fails to notice, it seems preferable to
begin by looking at the very depth of things. In contrast to what things appear
to suggest, a word, within the same linguistic community, does not
represent perfectly the same thing for all people. As early as the
19th century, Humboldt (1880) goes further to say that a word is
nothing but what each individual thinks it is. Georges Mounin (1957), explains
that each word is the sum of each individual's personal and subjective
experience concerning the object this word represents. Therefore, exchanging
words cannot assure a perfect communication of an idea between the members of
the same linguistic community. This is what Humboldt (1880) explains in the
following words:
"[...] chez celui qui assimile comme chez celui qui parle,
cette idée doit sortir de sa propre force intérieure : tout ce
que le premier reçoit consiste uniquement dans l'excitation harmonique
qui le met dans tel ou tel état d'esprit"
(p.25)
Obviously, different individuals perceive the same words in
different ways. This is why the same author suggests:
"Les paroles, même les plus concrètes et les plus
claires, sont loin d'éveiller les idées, les émotions, les
souvenirs que présume celui qui les prononce"
(p.25)
(see translation 2, Appendix C)
It is true that an extremist form of this view may raise a
controversy as to the extent of probable limitations to the communicative
capacity of language. However, recent psycholinguistic research findings
basically agree. They provide considerable evidence that, within the same
linguistic community, individual experience and perception associate different
mental images, from a person to another, with the same linguistic sign (Eco,
1997).
It might be concluded, as formulated by Mounin (1957), that
each language is nothing but the sum of its speakers' individual experiences,
and hence:
"[...] deux langues [...] n'emmagasinent jamais le même
stock d'expériences, d'images, de modes de vie et de pensée,
de
mythes, de conceptions du monde."
(p. 27)
(see translation 3, Appendix B)
Again, some earlier thinkers like Humboldt (1909) and
Schleiermacher (1813) attained this same conclusion as early as the
19th century. The latter put it as follows:
46 [...] chaque langue contient [...] un
système de concepts qui, précisément parce qu'ils se
touchent, s'unissent et se complètent dans la même langue, forment
un tout dont les différentes parties ne correspondent à
aucune de celles du système des autres langues. [...] Car même
l'absolument universel, bien qu'il se trouve hors du domaine de la
particularité, est éclairé et coloré par la
langue."
(p.85)
(see translation 4, Appendix B)
What Schleiermacher (1813) calls un système de
concepts is a human
being's or a group of individuals' system of
relative concepts that seek to
reach absolute concepts. In
other words, it is a tentative knowledge about
the world that constantly attempts to reach perfect accordance
with reality. What he means is that the interaction between the concepts of the
same language community results in a unique organized mixture or
system of concepts. Humboldt (1909) highlights a comparable concept when he
discusses the difference between languages:
"Des langues différentes sont donc comme des synonymes:
chacune exprime le même concept d'une manière un peu autre, avec
telle ou telle autre détermination concomitante, un peu plus haut ou un
peu plus bas sur l'échelle des sensations"
(p. 143)
(see translation 5, Appendix B)
It should be noted that, for Schleiermacher (1813), the real
object of translation is thought, and its real challenge is this
difference between systems of concepts. To clarify this position he further
adds that when translating:
"[...] j'établis ainsi des correspondances -qui ne sont
pas coïncidences- entre les représentations
véhiculées par différents langages, entre l'organisation
des concepts dans des langues
différentes."
(pp. 17-8)
(see translation 6, Appendix B)
Likewise, there is no doubt that this profound difference
between the 'spirits' of languages is associated with differences in lexis,
syntax, phonology and style. This difference is at the very core of the
translation task, and it is what determines the type and amount of the
translator's required linguistic knowledge.
| 
