cientific translation and imagery: a pilot study into subjective aspects of meaning in academic prose based on the use of several translations of a single source text
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/RP.2021.010Keywords
translation of academic prose, academic text, cognitive grammar, imageryAbstract
Scientific – and, more broadly, academic – discourse is often associated with impersonality, objectivity and a focus on facts. However, over the last two decades or so more and more linguistic studies have shown that it includes numerous linguistic elements that express the author’s subjective assessment of, attitude to or viewpoint on facts and scientific findings, the use of which is aimed at increasing the persuasiveness of the text. Therefore, it seems reasonable to enquire into what happens to the subjective elements of an academic text in translation, especially in view of the fact that translations ultimately express translators’ own interpretations, or conceptualizations, of the source text which may also be influenced by subjective factors, such as one’s personal knowledge, beliefs, cognitive abilities and experience. This paper presents a pilot study on subjective aspects of meaning in the translation of an academic text, based on the use of a miniature one-to-many parallel corpus consisting of a single English source text and its five Polish translations. The basic assumption behind this methodology is that multiple translations of the same source text produced by different translators should express the same “objective” content, which may, however, be construed differently as a result of shifts in the subjective aspects of meaning. A semantic analysis in terms of Ronald Langacker’s dimensions of imagery (aka focal adjustments) – so far mainly used to examine semantic “minutiae” in literary texts – bears out the hypothesis and casts some interesting light on the nature of the semantic shifts in question. Given the role of translation in the dissemination of knowledge and the important function of the subjective elements of an academic text, it is suggested that it is worth applying the concept of equivalence at the level of imagery in studies of the translation of academic prose.
References
Marks R., 2014, Self-efficacy and arthritis disability: An updated synthesis of the evidence base and its relevance to optimal patient care. „Health Psychology Open”, 1(1).
Baker M., 1992, In Other Words: A coursebook on translation, London–New York.
Bedyńska S., Brzezicka A., Cypryańska M., 2013, Od teorii do analizy statystycznej. Jak badać zjawiska psychologiczne?, [w:] Statystyczny drogowskaz 1. Praktyczne wprowadzenie do wnioskowania statystycznego, t. 1, S. Bedyńska, M. Cypryańska (red.), Warszawa, s. 17–45.
Bühler A., 2002, Translation as interpretation, [w:] Translation Studies: Perspectives on the Emerging Discipline, A. Riccardi (red.), Cambridge–New York, s. 56–74.
Croft W., Crurse D.A., 2004, Cognitive Linguistics, Cambridge–New York.
Cuyckens H., Geeraerts D., 2007, Introducing Cognitive Linguistics, [w:] The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, D. Geeraerts, H. Cuyckens (red.), Oxford–New York, s. 3–21.
Duszak A., 1994, Academic discourse and intellectual styles, „Journal of Pragmatics”, 21(3), s. 291–313.
Gajda S., 1982, Podstawy badań stylistycznych nad językiem naukowym, Warszawa.
Gray B., Biber D., 2012, Current conceptions of stance, [w:] Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres, K. Hyland, C. Sancho Guinda (red.), Basingstoke– New York, s. 15–33.
Hyland K., 1998, Hedging in Scientific Research Articles, Amsterdam–Philadelphia.
Hyland K., 2005, Stance and Engagement: a Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse, „Discourse Studies”, 7(2), s. 173–192.
Hyland K., 2014, Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles, [w:] Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices, Ch.N. Candlin, K. Hyland (red.), London–New York, s. 99–121.
Johnson M., 1987, The Body in the Mind. The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason, Chicago–London.
Kozłowska Z., 2007, O przekładzie tekstu naukowego (na materiale tekstów językoznawczych), wyd. 2, Warszawa.
Kiklewicz A., 2008, Ambisemia jako kategoria semantyki funkcjonalnej, „Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego”, z. 64, s. 63–75.
Lakoff G., 1991, Cognitive versus generative linguistics: How commitments influence results, „Language & Communication”, 11(1/2), s. 53–62.
Lakoff G., 2011 [1987], Kobiety, ogień i rzeczy niebezpieczne. Co kategorie mówią nam o umyśle, Kraków.
Langacker R.W., 1987, Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites, Stanford.
Langacker R.W., 2002 [1991], Concept, Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar, 2nd edition, Berlin–New York.
Langacker R.W., 2005, Obserwacje i rozważania na temat zjawiska subiektyfikacji, Kraków.
Langacker R.W., 2009, Gramatyka kognitywna. Wprowadzenie, Kraków.
Levý J., 2009 [1967], Przekład jako proces podejmowania decyzji, [w:] Współczesne teorie przekładu, P. Bukowski, M. Heydel (red.), Kraków, s. 71–86.
Malmkjaer K., 1998, Love thy Neighbour: Will Parallel Corpora Endear Linguists to Translators?, „Meta”, 43(4), s. 534–541.
Pisanski Peterlin A., 2010, Hedging Devices in Slovene-English Translation: A Corpus-Based Study, „Nordic Journal of English Studies”, 9(2), s. 171–193.
Schank R.C., Abelson R.P., 1977, Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding, Hillsdale.
Sedgley T., 2013, The responsibilities of being a physiotherapist, [w:] Tidy’s Physiotherapy, 15th edition, S.B. Porter (red.), Edinburgh–New York, s. 1–21.
Silver M., 2003, The Stance of Stance: a Critical Look at Ways Stance Is Expressed and Modeled in Academic Discourse, „Journal of English for Academic Purposes”, 2(4), s. 359–374.
Tabakowska E., 2001 [1993], Językoznawstwo kognitywne a poetyka przekładu, Kraków.
Tabakowska E., 2004, O językowych wyznacznikach punktu widzenia, [w:] Punkt widzenia w języku i w kulturze, J. Bartmiński, S. Niebrzegowska-Bartmińska, R. Nycz (red.), Lublin.
Vinay J.-P., Darbelnet J., 1957, Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais, Paris.
Witosz B., 2012, Naukowy język polski wobec metodologii ponowoczesnej, [w:] Oblicza polszczyzny, A. Markowski, R. Pawelec (red.), Warszawa, s. 241–252.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 802
Number of citations: 0