T.R.SELÇUK UNIVERSITY

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL SCIENCESFACULTY OF LETTERS

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

TYPES OF TRANSLATION

MA SEMINAR RESEARCH PAPER

Eda YAPICI

Advisor:

Assist. Prof. Dr. Yağmur KÜÇÜKBEZİRCİ

FEBRUARY 2015

KONYA

ii

ÖZET

Bu çalışmanın amacı, çeviri sürecinde kullanılan çeviri

tipleri hakkında kıyaslayıcı bir yöntemle bazı kısa açıklamalar

yapmaktır. Orijinal metinler ile farklı tercümanlar tarafından

tercüme edilmiş versiyonları arasındaki farklılıkları

görebilmek için, farklı romanlar, atasözleri, deyimler ve

şiirlerden alınan bazı cümleler ve paragraflar

karşılaştırılmalı bir şekilde anlamsal ve sözdizimsel

farklılıklara göre analiz edilmiştir. Daha sonra yeterli ve

uygun bir çeviri için bazı önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Birinci bölüm farklı bilim adamları ve sözlüklere göre

çevirinin tanımları, çevirinin genel amacını anlama ve çeviri

süreci hakkında bazı bilgiler sunmaktadır

Çeviri sürecinde kullanılan çeviri çeşitleri ve

özellikleri ikinci bölümdeki örneklerle izah edilmiştir.

Üçüncü bölüm bazı meşhur roman ve çeviri versiyonlarından

alıntı yapılan örnekleri kullanarak karşılaştırmalı bir çeviri

türü incelemesini kapsamaktadır.

Son olarak ise çalışma bazı değerlendirme ve sonuç ile

özetlenmiştir.

i

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to give some brief explanations

about types of translation which are used during the

translation process with examples in a comparative way. So as

to view the variations between the original texts and their

translated versions by different translators, some sentences

and paragraphs from different novels, proverbs, idioms and

poems are analysed in a contrastive way according to semantic

and syntactic differences. Then, possible suggestions to make

an adequate and appropriate translation are presented.

Chapter I provides some information about definitions of

translation according to different scientists and dictionaries,

general understanding of the purpose of translation and the

translation process.

ii

Types of translation that are used during the translation

process and their functions are explained with examples in

Chapter II.

Chapter III consists of some comparative studies of

translation types using extracts from some well-known novels

and their translated versions.

At last the study is summarized and concluded with some

evaluations.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ÖZET.........................................................i

ABSTRACT....................................................ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................iii

I. INTRODUCTION..............................................1

1.1. Definition of Translation..............................1

1.2. The Purpose of Translation.............................2

1.3. The Process of Translation.............................3

II. TYPES OF TRANSLATION.....................................4

2.1. SL Emphasis: Semantic Translation......................5

2.1.1. Word-for-Word Translation..........................6

2.1.2. Literal Translation................................8

2.1.3. Faithful Translation..............................10

2.2. TL Emphasis: Communicative Translation................12

2.2.1. Free Translation..................................16

2.2.2. Adaptation........................................17

2.2.3. Idiomatic Translation.............................19

2.2.4. Pragmatic Translation.............................21

III. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRANSLATION METHODS..........24

iv

CONCLUSION..................................................30

BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................31

v

I. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Definition of Translation

Besides being the subject of researches, translation is a

process of transferring messages across linguistic and cultural

barriers and a communicative language teaching activity.

Beier (2011:19) suggests that a translation occurs at some

point on a scale between source and target languages. This

might be indicated as in the scale below:

SL context ---------- x ----------- x ---------- x

---------- TL context

The translation may appear at any point along the line. It

may be closer to the language of the source text or of the

target text.

Macmillan Dictionary (2008: 1532) defines translation as

the activity of changing spoken or written words into a

different language. This means that it is a process of having a

source text (ST) and a target text (TT) that should be

definitely in different languages. The source language (SL) is

the language to be translated and the target language (TL) is

the language which the text is going to be translated into.

Another way to describe translation, as Newmark (1991:22-

24) did, is that it is transferring the meaning of a stretch or

a unit of language, the whole or a part of a text, from one

1

language into another. Translation, in general terms, is a

cover term that contains any way of transfer, oral and written,

from writing to speech, from speech to writing, of a message

from one language to another. In professional terms, however,

‘translation’ is confined to the written language, and the term

‘interpretation’ to the spoken language.

Very much similar to this definition is that by Sofer

(2002: 12) who maintains that translation is to transfer the

meaning of a stretch or a unit of language, the whole or a part

of a text from one language to another. It is the meaning of

meaning, rather than the meaning of equivalence, identity,

similarity, likeness, sameness and so on.

Translation consists in reproducing in the receptor

language the closest natural equivalent of the SL message,

first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style. But

this relatively simple statement requires careful evaluation of

several seemingly contradictory elements.

Leech (1975: 80, cited in Yılmaz, 2004: 46) defines

translation as the synonymous expression of any discourse in

another language. He has the idea that ‘ideal’ translation is

achieved through the principle of equivalence that consists of

the whole communicative value of a text in the other language

although it is impossible with literary texts in which the

translation of sense is not taken into consideration in order

to keep equivalence.

2

Munday (2001:4) gives several meanings of translation: it

can refer to 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). The process

of translation between two different written languages involves

the translator changing an original written text (ST) in the

original verbal language (SL) into a written text (TT) in a

different verbal language (TL).

1.2. The Purpose of Translation

Contributing to understanding and peace between nations,

groups and individuals is expressed as the first purpose of

translation by Newmark (1991: 43). This formulation highlights

the pragmatic elements of translation – the effect on the

readership, the manner, the style etc.

The most evident task of the translator, which embraces

the second purpose of translation, is to achieve knowledge

transfer in a simple, proper and accessible language,

especially related to technology transfer.

Showing respect to strengths and weaknesses of cultures,

giving common humanity based explanations and mediating between

cultures might be considered as the third purpose of

translation.

The fourth main purpose is to translate the world’s great

books and the universal works such as poetry, drama, fiction,

religion, philosophy, history, the seminal works of psychology,

3

sociology and politics, and works of individual and social

behaviour.

The fifth purpose is to provide some general help or a

skill which is called for the acquisition of a foreign

language.

1.3. The Process of Translation

Robinson (2003: 90-91) indicates that beginner translators

begin a text by approaching with an instinctual sense that they

know how to perform this, that they are going to be good at it,

that it might be fun; with their first real experience of a

text they realize that they don't know how to proceed, but soon

they start translating and learn inductively as they go, by

trial and error, make mistakes and failures and learn something

from those mistakes. They gradually conclude patterns and

regularities that help them translate more rapidly and more

effectively; and eventually these patterns and regularities

become habit or second nature. They are constantly forced to

review what they have learned via contact with new texts.

Robinson cites from Weick's terms: the enact—select—retain

cycle might be reformulated as translate, edit, sublimate:

1 Translate: act; jump into the text feet first; translate

intuitively.

2 Edit: think about what you've done; test your intuitive

responses against everything you know; but edit intuitively

too, allowing an intuitive first translation to challenge (even

successfully) a well-reasoned principle that you believe in

4

deeply; let yourself feel the tension between intuitive

certainty and cognitive doubt, and don't automatically choose

one over the other; use the act—response—adjustment cycle

rather than rigid rules.

3 Sublimate: internalize what you've learned through this

give-and-take process for later use; make it second nature;

make it part of your intuitive repertoire; but sublimate it

flexibly, as a directionality that can be redirected in

conflictual circumstances; never, however, let subliminal

patterns bind your flexibility; always be ready if needed "to

doubt, argue, contradict, disbelieve, counter, challenge,

question, vacillate, and even act hypocritically (be willing to

break your own rules).”

Snell- Hornby (2006: 69) specifies that the translator’s

text analysis must start with identifying the text from the point

of culture and situation. The next step is the analysis of the

structure of the text together with the relationship between the

title and the main body of the text and finally strategies must be

developed for translating the text, on the basis of inferences

obtained from the analysis.

5

II. TYPES OF TRANSLATION

SL and TL, the foreign culture and native culture, the

writer and the intention and type of the text and the

translator’s purpose are the main factors to determine the

appropriate translation type. The translator should take all

these factors into consideration and decide which of these to

give priority. The translator should be aware of the fact that

various translation types (methods) might be used for the same

text.

To be able to name the types of translation, the

translator’s degree of faithfulness to the text to be

translated or his degree of freedom in changing the form and

style of the text are predictive factors. As an example, the

translator’s faithfulness to the content can be shown in

literal or word-for-word translation types while his freedom in

changing the form or style can be shown in free, communicative,

pragmatic and idiomatic types of translation.

Newmark (1988: 45) mentions two translation types as SL

emphasis and TL emphasis as in the following:

SL Emphasis: Semantic Translation

Word-for-word Translation,

Literal Translation,

Faithful Translation.

6

TL Emphasis: Communicative Translation

Free Translation,

Adaptation,

Idiomatic Translation,

Pragmatic Translation.

These translation types and the differences between them

will be analyzed by giving some comparative examples in the

following parts of this study.

2.1. SL Emphasis: Semantic Translation

Semantic translation is a type of translation whose

purpose is to find a semantic equivalence in the translation of

the SL to the TL. It pays special attention to the content and

meaning of the message rather than the effect. It might be

considered as a type of literal translation. Literal

translation is a sort of word-for-word translation while

semantic translation must also express the meaning.

Semantic translation is a sort of text transfer to

recreate the exact contextual meaning of the SL also in the TL,

of course within the boundaries of semantics and syntax in the

TL. (Hatim, 2001: 88)

Form and content in this method are taken into

consideration as equally important. Newmark (1981: 47) remarks:

“Semantic translation attempts to recreate the precise flavour and tone of the

7

original: the words are ‘sacred’, not because they are more important than the

content, but because form and content are one.”

Newmark (1988: 46) interprets that the difference between

‘faithful’ and ‘semantic’ translation is that the former is

inflexible and dogmatic, while the latter is more flexible and

allows for the translator’s instinctive empathy with the

original. Munday (2001: 44) cites that according to Newmark

(1981: 39):

‘Semantic translation attempts to render, asclosely as the semantic and syntactic structuresof the second language allow, the exactcontextual meaning of the original.’

The semantic nuance is very important. This requires

semantic translation to be detailed and complex. This explains

the reason why all important statements, legal documents and

scientific articles are generally translated semantically to be

able to transmit the essence and flavour of the original text.

Below there is an example of an English proverb translated

semantically and communicatively into Turkish in order to give

a simple idea about communicative translation, too:

‘Strike the iron while it is still hot.’

Semantic Translation: ‘Demiri hala sıcakken döv.’

8

Communicative Translation: ‘Demir tavında dövülür.’

Some other translation examples are given below to let us

compare the basic principles of semantic translation and

communicative translation:

‘The last straw that broke the camel’s back.’

Semantic Translation: Devenin belini kıran son saman çöpü

Communicative Translation: Bardağı taşıran son damla.

(transferring the culture)

‘Save money for rainy days.’

Semantic Translation: Yağmurlu günler için para biriktir.

Communicative Translation: Kara günler için para biriktir.

/ Ak akçe kara gün içindir.

(Küçükbezirci, 2007:

30)

2.1.1. Word-for-Word Translation

In this translation type, the SL word order is saved and

the words are translated by their most common meanings. SL

grammar and word order are transmitted in addition to the basic

meanings of all SL words. This translation type is usually

expressed as interlinear translation because the SL words are

translated directly on the following lines, out of context.

Cultural words are translated literally. Newmark (1988: 45)

9

It can be inferred from these explanations and the

essentials mentioned about translation that word-for-word

translation type cannot be applied on a text itself. This

method has a primary place in pre-translation process. The

translator uses this type of translation preparatory to

translating the text with the new form in the TL. Since the

translator is supposed to change the form so as to provide the

same influence in the TL and to make it more meaningful.

This translation type is principally applied to appreciate

the system of the SL or to make sense of a difficult text

before translating, which is why it is insufficient on its own

to translate a text.

It is vital to highlight that in this type of translation,

only dictionary meaning or lexical meaning is taken into

consideration and only short simple sentences can be translated

successfully with the use of this method. It is likely to be

seen as an unpractical translation type as it is clarified

above that many features of any language are impossible to be

translated only on the basis of dictionary meaning as can be

seen in cultural words.

The following example is extracted from the Turkish

translation of Hemingway’s ‘For Whom The Bell Tolls’ by Güler

Dikmen Nalbantoğlu (1990).

10

‘I made a fool of myself with him once tonightand I am perfectly willing to liquidate him. ButI am not going to fool with him beforehand. Andthere aren’t going to be any shooting matches ormonkey business in here with that dynamite aroundeither…you deserve whatever happens to you…’ hethought.”

‘Bu gece zaten onun karşısında aptal yerinekoydum kendimi ve onu devreden çıkarmaya da çokistekliyim. Ama önceden onunla eğlenmeyeceğim. Vebu dinamit de buradayken artık böyle vurmaişleri, maymunluklar olmayacak burada… Başına negelirse hak ediyorsun diye düşündü.’

(Çakır, 1992: 110-111)

This translation exactly exemplifies word-for-word

translation type. Translating some expressions and idioms in

this way prevents the translated text from reflecting the sense

of the original expression. The expression ‘shooting matches

and monkey business’ has been rendered as ‘vurma işleri,

maymunluklar’.

Here is another translated version of the same text by

Mete Ergin (1969):

‘Bu gece bir kere onun önünde kendimi aptalmevkiine düşürdüm: onu yok etmeyi çok isterimdoğrusu. Yalnız daha önce onu küçük düşürmeye dekalkmayacağım. Dinamitler varken de, burada ateş

11

etmek, hır çıkarmak doğru olmaz… Artık başına negelirse hak ettin bunu, diye içinden geçirdi.’

(Çakır, 1992: 110)

When examining these two translated versions of the same

text, it can be realized that translation does not have the

same meaning as the original. For instance, in the second

version, the expression ‘shooting matches and monkey business’

has been translated as ‘ateş etmek, hır çıkarmak’. This can be

considered to be more effective in conveying the meaning of the

original text than the first version. There is no point in

justifying the radical alterations made by the translator. A

translator has to keep the context and the writer’s focus in

view.

The first translator translates ‘But I am not going to

fool with him beforehand’ as ‘Ama önceden onunla

eğlenmeyeceğim’. The second translates it as ‘Yalnız daha önce

onu küçük düşürmeye de kalkmayacağım’. Contrasting these two

versions, we can deduce that the second translator attaches

priority to the communicative features of the text.

2.1.2. Literal Translation

Çakır (2006: 34) implies that literal translation is a

sort of word-for-word translation and it can be applied when

the content and form of both texts overlap with each other. It

12

can be used as a pre-translation activity to overcome some

problems like ambiguity and obscurity. In word-for-word

translation, the unit is the word and the word order is the

same. In literal translation, however, the unit is the sentence

and source language in which grammatical structures are adapted

to their nearest target language equivalents. But the lexical

words are again translated independently in contrast to

translating the whole phrase out of context. This signifies

that the translator has to be lexically faithful.

Nevertheless, he/she can make some differences in the language

form to be able to give the same effect and the meaning.

A word-for-word translation closely following the form of

the source language is called a literal translation. Larson

(1984:10) debates that a literal translation is useful when the

source structure text is studied as in an interlinear

translation, but a literal translation is not so good at

conveying the meaning of the source text. Its general aim is to

help someone read a text in its original language. It is not

natural and easily comprehensible and even may not make any

sense at all.

Munday (2001: 57) cites that according to Vinay and

Darbelnet; literal translation is the writer’s prescription for

good translation: ‘literalness should only be sacrificed because of structural

and metalinguistic requirements and only after checking that the meaning is fully

preserved’ (1995: 288). The translator, however, may regard

literal translation as ‘unacceptable’ because it:

gives a different meaning;

13

has no meaning;

is impossible for structural reasons;

‘does not have a corresponding expression within the

metalinguistic experience of the TL;

corresponds to something at a different level of

language.

Küçükbezirci (2007: 56) indicates that in literal

translation, word-for-word translation is so much emphasized

that it deforms the sense and the syntax of the translation.

Literal translation means ‘the closest possible

grammatical translation, probably not sounding very natural.

The closeness to the original form is emphasized in either

case.

Literal translation type is exemplified in the sentence

below:

‘I‘m afraid there is no bread at home’ is translated into

Turkish hereinbelow:

‘Korkarım evde hiç ekmek yok’

But, it could be translated as:

‘Üzgünüm ama evde ekmek kalmamış’.

This simply indicates that in order to make a winning

translation is not always reachable by using solely literal

translation method as it is also at word level. It will also be

more practical to conduct other translation methods that give

importance equality at text level.

14

Another obstacle emerges in translating proper names and

place names relying on the historical and cultural connotations

in source language readers’ minds.

‘Çanakta balın olsun, Bağdat’tan arın gelir.’

The literal translation of this proverb is:

‘If you have honey in the bowl, bees come from Bağdat.’

‘Bağdat’ has a connotation of distance for the source

language reader, as opposed to the target language reader.

Therefore, for the target language reader, to make them

understand what is meant, it can be translated as:

‘How many friends you have depends on how much money you

have.’ Or

Communicative translation: ‘The more money you have, the

more friends you have.

‘Don’t count your chickens before they hatch.’

Its literal translation: ‘Yumurtadan çıkmadan önce

tavuklarını sayma.’

The translator must convey the meaning of the idiom into

the TL with an equivalent idiom if possible in order to

translate idioms. Namely, the translator should prefer

idiomatic renderings to make the translation more effective

than literal renderings. The closest Turkish equivalents of

this proverb are:

‘Dereyi görmeden paçayı sıvama.’ or

‘Ayıyı vurmadan postunu satma.’ or

15

‘Doğmamış çocuğa don biçme.’

(Çakır, 1992:

161)

2.1.3. Faithful Translation

Faithful translation might be seen as a kind of author-

centered translation. The translator is faithful to the text,

author and to the intention of the author. It is like a

paraphrase in the sense that it intends to reproduce the

contextual meaning of SL by keeping the TL grammatical

structures.

Literal translation is a kind of faithful translation. But

in this method, the unit is longer than a word. It may be a

sentence or a paragraph, for example.

Faithful translation challenges to translate the exact

contextual meaning of the original text within the restrictions

of the TL grammatical structures. It conveys cultural words and

maintains the degree of grammatical and lexical deviation in

accordance with SL norms. It attempts to be entirely faithful

to the intentions and the text-realization of the SL writer.

(Newmark, 1988: 46) As a result, it is clear that form is not

very important but the translator has to be faithful to the

intention of the original text.

Robinson (2003:239) gives the following example which

identifies what is meant by faithful translation:

16

Original Text:

Aristophan komedisi bazı ideolojileri yermekteve bazılarını da savunmakta oldukça farklıolduğundan geçtiğimiz yüzyıl ve yarım yüzyıldanfazla bir süredir ‘Lysistratas’, basılagelenbirçok çevirmen kendi ideolojilerini belirtmeihtiyacı duymuşlardır.

Paraphrase:

Aristophenic comedy is considered to be radicalin assisting in certain ideologies and incontrasting with some others. The ‘Lysistratas’translators, who wants to state their own ideas,have been working for the past century and ahalf.

Translation:

Since Aristophanic comedy is rather radical inattacking certain ideologies and defendingothers, most of the translation whose‘Lysistratas’ have been published over the pastcentury and a half have felt the need to statetheir own ideology.

Çakır (2006: 68) cites some translated versions of

Hemingway’s ‘For Whom the Bell Tolls’ by Nurettin Özyürek

(1996), and the second by Mete Ergin (1969):

17

‘…and she fed the children too and even letthem eat of the cabbage, only, she saved theheart of it for him. She ate also after this, butsparingly for she seemed less zestful in herhunger today, somehow, so there was still muchrice left…’ (Ibid, p.41-42)

‘…Çocukların da önlerine kendi paylarınısürdü, hatta lahananın göbeğini babalarınaayırdıktan sonra dış yapraklarından, onlara davereceğini söyledi. Birazcık da kendisi yedi… Hervakit ki gibi iştahı yoktu…’ (Ibid, p.71)

‘…Çocukların da karnını doyurdu. Hatta önlerinelahana bile verdi. Yalnız lahananın göbeğinierkeğine ayırdı. Bundan sonra kendisi de yemekyedi, ama. Pek az. Nedense bugün pek iştahıyoktu, öyleki bir sürü pirinç arta kaldı…’ (Ibid,p.60)

The first version of the sentence fails to express the

meaning of the original sentence. The original says ‘she fed

the children…’ but its translation says ‘çocukların da önlerine

kendi paylarını sürdü.’. The original says ‘she let them eat

of…’ whereas the translation says ‘onlara da vereceğini

söyledi…’. The sentence ‘her zamanki gibi iştahı yoktu’ is two-

edged as it has two different meanings: ‘she has no appetite as

18

usual’ and ‘she has not got her usual appetite’. So as to avoid

ambiguity, the preposition ‘gibi’ has to be taken out.

The second version seems relatively more faithful to the

original in semantical terms.

2.2. TL Emphasis: Communicative Translation

The initial goal of communicative translation is to

provide a contextually equivalent text to the original in order

that both language and content are readily acceptable and

understandable to the reader. The translator has to communicate

with the readership to make the translation acceptable and

understandable; and he feels free about how to convey the

message of the source text into the target text.

Communicative translation is reader-centered and flexible

at the reader’s level of language and knowledge. Compared to

semantic translation, it has more potential to create

equivalent effect at the writer’s level. Newmark (1988: 49)

Newmark (1981, cited in Hatim 2001) defines communicative

translation as a mode aiming to produce the same effect on the

TL readers as was produced by the original on the SL readers.

The equivalent effect is the primary focus of the application

of this method. Since it is always set on the reader, the key

assumption of the communicative translation is that translation

should read like the original. The translator is to keep his

costumer’s demands in view. To put it another way,

communicative translation might be considered to be

19

fundamentally functional. Its target is to communicate the

original message successfully and satisfactorily.

We may have the same opinion that translation is a means

of communication although some linguists believe communication

has no place in translation. But, this does not prove the

assumption that translating is nothing but communicating. The

translator must see both sides of the coin. Every translator

knows certainly that meaning is complicated, many leveled and a

production of complex relations. The translator must be aware

of the possibility that more communication may mean more

generalization and simplification and as a result the loss of

meaning. (Çakır, 2006: 35)

Larson (1984: 35) argues that the meaning chosen will be

influenced by the communication situation, e.g., by who the

speaker / writer is, who the audience / reader is, the

traditions of the culture, etc. When the meaning is determined,

the translator has the freedom to use the forms of the language

in which he wants to communicate that meaning.

The following poem Annabel Lee by Edgar Ellan POE is

translated by Melih Cevdet ANDAY. It can be assessed as a good

example of communicative translation.

ANNABEL LEE

It was many and many a

year ago,

In a kingdom by the sea

That a maiden there live

whom you may know

20

By the name of “Annabel

Lee”;

And this maiden she lived

with no other thought

Than to love and be loved

by me.

I was a child and she was

a child,

In this kingdom by the

sea,

But we loved with a love

that was more than love,

I and my “Annabel Lee”-

With a love that the

winged seraphs of heaven

Coveted her and me.

…

ANNABEL LEE

Senelerce senelerce

evveldi

Bir deniz ülkesinde

Yaşayan bir kız vardı

bileceksiniz

İsmi; Annabel Lee

Hiç birşey düşünmezdi

sevilmekten

Sevmekten başka beni

O çocuk ben çocuk,

memleketimiz

O deniz ülkesiydi

Sevdalı değil

karasevdalıydık

Ben ve Annabel Lee

Göklerde uçan melekler

Kıskanırlardı bizi

Bir gün işte bu yüzden

göze geldi

O deniz ülkesinde

Üşüdü bir rüzgârından

bulutun

…

In communicative translation, the reader’s understanding

takes precedence over the form and the syntax of the original

text. The translator has the freedom to change the form and the

syntax easily with respect to the needs of the readers and the

culture of the target language.

21

Here are some English idioms and their Turkish

translations in both semantic and communicative translation

methods:

‘Kick the bucket’

Semantic Translation: Kovaya vurmak

Communicative Translation: Ölmek, nalları dikmek

‘Where there is life, there is hope’

Semantic Translation: Nerede hayat var ise orada ümit

vardır.

Communicative Translation: Çıkmadık candan ümit kesilmez.

‘To feel the pulse’

Semantic Translation: Nabzı hissetmek

Communicative Translation: Nabza gore şerbet vermek

(Özkul, 2011)

Çakır (1992: 112) cites some extracts from two translated

versions of ‘The Mother’ by Pearl Buck (1963). The first

version is by Mebrure Sami (1940) and the second version is by

Nihal Yeğinobalı (1990):

Now when the pedlar said the price, at thatmoment the mother came forth with the money inher hand counted and exact to the last penny andshe cried out alarmed. ‘we can spend no more.’(The mother, 1973: 37)

22

‘Tam satıcı fiyatını söylerken ana avucundametelik metelik saydığı, tamamladığı parasıylaçıkageldi. Korkarak bağırdı: Paramız yok bizim….fazla birşey alamayız!’ (Ana, 1940: 63)

‘Tam satıcı kumaşın fiyatını söylerken anaelinde öteki parçanın parasıyla çıkageldi ve olupbiteni görünce telaşa kapılarak: - Daha fazlaverecek paramız yok ki!’ diye bağırdı. (Ana,1990: 53-54)

Both translators seem to have the same attitude towards

the translation of this statement. They try to make their

translation read like the original text by using communicative

type of translation. They do not consider much about the

individual words. e.g.. the word ‘alarmed’ has been rendered in

the versions as ‘korkarak...’ and ‘telaşa kapılarak’.

Literal translation of ‘We can spend no more’ might be

‘daha fazla para harcayamayız.’ Yet, here it has been

translated as ‘paramız yok bizim!’ and ‘daha fazla verecek

paramız yok ki!’.

2.2.1. Free Translation

23

Free translation type includes imitating the issue without

the manner, or the content without the original form. It

generally interprets the text longer than the original. Namely,

the same content is conveyed in the target text but with quite

different grammatical structures. (Newmark, 1988: 46)

This type of translation contains all the types of free

translation. In free translation, the most important features

are the message, effect, feeling and purpose of the writer, not

style or form. To be able to perform this, the translator has

the liberty to make any change in the original text translating

it to the target language.

Therefore, in SL, for giving the same message of the

original text without any constraints, the translator may make

any lexical or grammatical change on the text as long as giving

the same impact. (Özkul, 2011: 23)

Free translation can be called a ‘pretentious’ version,

but not like a translation. Some examples for free translation

are given below:

1. ‘The young and The Restless’

Gençler ve Huzursuzlar

Free translation: Yalan Rüzgarı

2. ‘Loving’

Sevmek

Free translation: Hayat Ağacı

24

(Yılmaz, 2004:

59)

The fact that free translation is absolute and mostly much

longer or shorter than the original text, is quite noticeable.

Çakır (2006: 51) cites two translated versions of

Hemingway’s ‘For Whom the Bell Tolls’ to show the application

of free translation method:

The first version is by Güler Dikmen Nalbantoğlu (1990),

and the second one is by Vahdet Gültekin (1979).

‘It is an idiocy and a weakness not to havekilled him. Last night, Roberto should havekilled him.’ The gypsy said. (Ibid, p.209)

‘Bir budalalık ve zayıflıktır onu öldürmemişolmak. Geçen gece Robert öldürmeliydi onu.’ Dediçingene. (Ibid, p.224)

Çingene: ‘öldürmedik te aptallık ettik. Robertoonu dün gece öldürseydi, iyi ederdi.’ dedi.(Ibid, p.100…169)

25

The latter is different from the former both in terms of

style and interpretation because it does not remain faithful to

the form and content of the original.

2.2.2. Adaptation

Adaptation is the freest type of translation which is

mostly used for plays (comedies) and poetry. The themes,

characters, plots are usually preserved, the SL culture is

adapted to the TL culture and then the text is written again.

The translator is not faithful to the text or to the author to

be able to reflect the SL culture perceptibly.

Adaptation is a type of translation in which the

translator is in need of making amends more than lexical and

grammatical items. The translators specifically prefer this

type to translate poems or plays. The plot, characters or

themes are not changed by the translator. The cultural

differences of the source language are adapted to the target

language in an understandable way. These changes and adaptation

include changing the cultural reference when a situation in the

SL does not exist in the target culture – a cultural gap.

(Munday, 2001: 58) So, another equivalent situation needs to be

created. A cultural SL word is translated by a TL cultural word

so as to meet the expectations of the target audience.

Hatim (2001: 20) infers that adaptation contains a set of

modification techniques whose purpose is to increase

26

translation equivalence and to guarantee that the target

language version is accessible in the process.

Yılmaz (2004: 58-59) cites an extract from Shakespeare’s

Sonnett No.47 that serves as a model of adaptation by Talat

Sait Halman (1997: 134-5):

Betwixt mine eye and heart a league is took,

And each doth good turns now unto the other.

Anlaşıp birleştiler benim gözümle gönlüm,

Karşılıklı iyilik yaparlar, gerek varsa.

Here is another example taken from a poem named ‘Annabel

Lee’. In this poem, the translator uses the Adaptation method:

‘…but we loved with a love that was more than love…’:

‘…sevdalı değil kara sevdalıydık…’

(cited in Gün,

2010: 20-21)

This example can also be studied for free translation.

In his book Advanced Translation Practice, Kalay (2005: 73-75)

gives an example for adaptation method.

‘The quake caused brief panic among locals,especially in state institutions and schools,with many people running out into the streets.’

27

‘Deprem, özellikle kamu kuruluşları veokullarda kısa surely bir paniğe yol açarken pekçok kişi kendini sokağa attı.’

2.2.3. Idiomatic Translation

Idiomatic translation deals with idioms and colloquialisms

which are not present in the source text. As to Larson (1984:

16-19), idiomatic translation is the kind of translation in

which a translator wants to achieve since it is like the SL

text in the TL. He has some difficulties in achieving an

accurate transfer of the idiomatic idea, which suggests that

translations consist of literal transfer of the grammatical

components and idiomatic translation of the sense of the text.

Newmark (1988: 47) explains idiomatic translation as

reproducing the ‘message’ of the original however inclines to

twist nuances of meaning by choosing colloquialisms and idioms

where those do not exist in the original.

In the grammatical constructions and in the selection of

lexical units, idiomatic translations use the natural forms of

the target language. An actual idiomatic translation does not

sound like a translation. It sounds like it was originally

written in the target language. Hence, what a good translator

must do is to make the translation idiomatically. This must be

the target. Translations, however, are often a combination of a

literal transfer of the grammatical units together with

idiomatic translation of the meaning of the text. Consistently

28

translating idiomatically is not so much easy. A translator may

express some parts of the translation in very natural forms and

then in other parts transform a literal form. Translations fall

on a range from very literal, to literal, to modified literal,

to near idiomatic, to idiomatic, and then may even move on to

be unduly free which add some extra information.

very literal literal modified literal inconsistent mixture near idiomatic idiomatic

unduly free

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Translator’s Goal

(Larson, 1984: 19)

The examples below that include the answers of some

students to a translation test can exemplify idiomatic

translation:

1. ‘İftarı nerede edeceğimize karar verelim.’

Let’s decide where to have the ‘iftar’ meal.

Let’s decide where to break our fast.

2. ‘Dilini mi yuttun?’

Did you swallow your tongue?

Cat got your tongue?

29

3. ‘Kırk yılda bir birlikte yemeğe çıkarlardı.’

They go out for dinner every forty years.

They go out for dinner once in a blue moon.

To give an idea about how to translate idioms, some

English idioms and their approximate Turkish equivalents are

given below:

The apple of my eye: Gözümün bebeği

To put one’s foot in: Pot kırmak

To feel the pulse: Nabza gore şerbet vermek

To be out of the blue: Ümitsizliğe düşmek

To have a finger in every pie: Her işe burnunu sokmak

(Gün, 2010:

35)

To read someone like a book: ciğerini okumak

Example: I know why he did that. I can read him like a

book.

To read between the lines: Leb demeden leblebiyi anlamak

Example: It is easy enough for anybody who can read

between the lines to see what is at the back of his mind.

(Çakır, 1992:

149)

30

2.2.4. Pragmatic Translation

Pragmatic translation and Communicative translation are

almost the same. Pragmatic translation is applied in regard to

rhetorical deep structure and it requires to achieve pragmatic

equivalence. The equivalent effect principle is of the essence

in the application of this translation type because the focus

is always on the reader. The most important assumption of

Pragmatic translation is that translation should read like the

original. The aim of the translator is to inform, to persuade,

to give advice or to meet whatever the reader’s demand. This

suggests that to apply the equivalent effect principle, he can

improve or rearrange the original text without meaning loss. In

other words, pragmatic translation is basically functional.

‘Pragmatic translation may mean ‘advocatingbehave, our that is dictated more by practicalconsequences than by theory or dogma’, in whichcase we could be discussing practicaltranslation, translation which successfullyfulfils its purpose; such translation is adesirable aim provided that the purpose is clear,e.g. to reproduce the information in the SL text,to ‘transfer’ the persuasive power of a notice ora tourist brochure into another language cultureas efficiently as possible.’

(Newmark, 1991:116)

31

(Newmark, 1991: 116)

The examples below are to show the application of semantic

and pragmatic translation types and the basic differences

between them:

‘He is his father’s son.’

Pragmatic translation: ‘Hık demiş babasının burnundan

düşmüş’ or

‘O babasına çekmiş.’

Semantic translation: ‘O babasının oğludur.’

‘If you cannot beat them. Join them.’

Pragmatic translation: ‘Bükemediğin eli öp.’

Semantic translation: ‘Eğer onları yenemiyorsan, onlara

katıl.’

‘We killed two birds with one stone.’

Pragmatic translation: Bir taşla iki kuş vurduk.

Semantic translation: It overlaps the pragmatic

translation.

32

(Çakır, 1992: 75-77)

Now we will apply the same methods to longer extracts.

‘On Saturday 10 July a so-called extraordinarysession which was rather the continuation of asession which itself was far from being ordinarycame to an end.

Whilst in June the deputies offered themselvesthe luxury of debating the capital gains bill for20 sessions. The senators for their part werebecoming sadly bored. The government not havingsufficiently utilized the possibility ofintroducing drafts for first reading for thatassembly. Thus at the end of the ordinarysession, the senate recorded a deficit of 30%compared with the length of time it had sat inspring 1975.’

(Newmark, 1981: 55)

Here shows an alternative way to translate this passage

pragmatically:

’10 Temmuz Cumartesi günü olağanüstü bir oturumdöneminin kapanmasına tanık oldu. Aslında bu(oturum) olağan olmaktan çok çok uzak biroturumun devamıydı.

33

Haziran ayında milletvekilleri parasalkazançlarla ilgili kanun taslağını 20 oturumdurgörüşme zevkine ererlerken hükümetin kanuntaslaklarını görüşmek için senatoya iletmefırsatını yeterince değerlendirmemesi nedeniylesenatörler sıkıntıdan patlıyorlardı. Bu nedenlesenato olağan çalışma dönemi sonunda, 1975 yazdönemindeki yapmış olduğu çalışma süresinin ancak%70 kadarına ulaşabiliyordu.’

The semantically translated version of the same passage

is:

‘10 Temmuz Cumartesi günü daha ziyade bircelsenin devamı olan sözde olağanüstü bir celseki kendisi olağan olmaktan çok uzaktı, sona erdi.

Haziranda milletvekilleri parasal kazançlarkanun teklifini 20 celsedir görüşme lüksünükendilerine sunarlarken, hükümet kanuntekliflerini ilk görüşme için kendilerine sunmafırsatını yeterince değerlendirmediğinden,senatörler kendi adlarına fena haldesıkılıyorlardı. Böylece olağan celse sonunda,senato 1975 ilkbaharındaki oturum süresine goreyüzde otuz bir azalma kaydediyordu.’

34

III. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRANSLATION METHODS

In this part of the study, some utterances, sentences and

passages extracted from various translated versions of

different texts will be studied and analysed comparatively.

The following example is taken from Hemingway’s ‘For Whom

the Bell Tolls’. The four different versions are from four different

Turkish translations by different translators. The

dissimilarities between the translations confirm the complex

nature of translation and the application of different

translation types. They also show that the same text can be

translated in various ways because translators may have

different points of view about the text and emphasize the

different points because of the differences between their own

world experiences. Therefore, the meaning of the same utterance

can vary from translator to translator.

The first version is by Nurettin Özyürek (1966), the

second is by Mete Ergin (1969), the third is by Vahdet Gültekin

(1979) and the fourth one is by Güler Dikmen Nalbantoğlu

(1990). For the sake of simplicity and clarity, the versions

will appear in the given order.

35

“Let all speak. ‘Pilar said and her voice wastired. ‘Thou Ardres?’

‘Matario.’ The brother with the dark hairgrowing far down in the point on his foreheadsaid and nodded his head.

‘Eladio?’“Equally the other brother’ said. “To me he

seems to constitute a great danger. And he servesfor nothing.’ (Ibid, 2.10)

1. ‘Herkes düşüncesini söylesin.’ DiyenPilar’ın sesi yorgundu.

‘Sen Andres?’İki kardeşten karo saçlı dar alınlı olanı

başını sallayarak ‘Matario (ölmeli)’ dedi.Kardeşlerden ikincisi. ‘bencede’ dedi. ‘Bana

kalırsa adam büyük bir tehlike yaratmakta, hem dehiçbir işe yaramamaktadır. (Ibid, p.213)

2. “Herkes düşüncesini söylesin.” dedi Pilar.Sesi yorgun çıkıyordu.

‘Sen Andres?’İki kardeşten kakülü uzayıp alnından sarkık

olanı. ‘Matario’ dedi.‘Eladio?’Kardeşlerin öbürü ‘aynen’ dedi. “Bence bir

tehlike meydana getiriyor. Bir işe de yaramıyor.’(Ibid, p.231)

3. Pilar: ‘Dur bakalım hepsine soralım.’ dedi.Sesinde halsizlik vardı. ‘Sen ne dersin Andres?’

İki kardeşin o dar alınlı, kara saçlısı, başınısallayarak: ‘Matario’ dedi.

‘Eladio, sen?’İki kardeşin ötekisi: ‘Bence de öyle.’ dedi.

‘Bana sorarsanız bizim için büyük bir tehlikediro. bir işe de yaradığı yok.’ (Ibid, p.169)

4. ‘Hepimiz konuşalım,’ dedi Pilar.‘Sen Andres?’ ‘Matario’ dedi siyah saçları

alnını bürümüş olan kardeş ve başını salladı.‘Eladio?’

‘Aynısı’ dedi öbür kardeş. ‘Bence o büyük birtehlike oluşturacağa benziyor. Ve hiçbir şeye

36

yaradığı da yok.’ (Ibid, p.224)

It can be easily seen that in the second and fourth

versions, the translations of “the brother with the dark hair

growing far down in the point of his forehead said…’ emphasizes

the same points and look more faithful to the original. As for

the first and second, they are obviously examples of free

translation and look almost the same.

‘You could blind him and he would be easy tohandle.’

‘Shut up.’ Pilar said. ‘I feel something veryjustified against thee too when thou talks.

‘Gözlerini kör ettiniz mi, ona istenilen şeyikolayca yaptırabilirsiniz.’

‘Kapa çeneni!’ dedi Pilar. ‘Sen böylekonuşurken, sana da birşeyler yapmak geliyoriçimden.’ (Ibid, p.214)

‘Pablo’nun gözlerini kör edersiniz, o zamanele geçirmek kolay olur.’

‘Kapat çeneni!’ dedi Pilar. “Ağzını açtığınzamanlar haklı olarak senin için de hiç iyişeyler düşünmüyorum yani.’ (Ibid, s.232)

‘…sen kör edersin kolayca yakalarız.’Pilar: ‘Sus bakayım’ dedi. ‘Sen böyle

konuştukça sana da hıncım artıyor.’ (Ibid, p.170) ‘Onu kör edebilirdiniz. Böylece yönetilmesi de

kolay olurdu.’‘Kapa,’ dedi Pilar. ‘Sen konuştuğun zaman sana

karşı da çok haklı çıkarabilecek kötü bir şeylerhissediyorum.’ (Ibid, p.225)

37

The word ‘you’ in ‘you could blind him’ does not emphasize

the second person singular as translated in number three. It is

impersonal. In the last version, the first sentence has been

translated in Past Simple while Present Simple is used in the

original.

‘He would be easy to handle’ has been translated as ‘We

catch him easily’ in the second and third versions. This shows

that the verb ‘handle’ has not been translated with its

original meaning. The translator feels free to add his own

thoughts and comments to the translation. The third version

means ‘you could have him do everything easily.’ which is also

far from the actual meaning of the original. Alternatively, it

should have been translated as: ‘…Onunla uğraşmak / başa çıkmak

kolay olurdu’.

The translator in the last version has used word for word

translation type while translating the last sentence. As long

as the translation expresses the same meanings of the original

text appropriately, there is no need to justify the quality of

this translation. But the meaning has been sacrificed for the

sake of the words here.

…Pablo watched her kneeling, holding the bowlup and watched the light red wine flooding intothe bowl so fast that it made a whirling motionas it filled it.

38

1. Pablo yere diz çökmüş kızı; çanağı yukarıdoğru tutuşunu, hızla aktığı için çanakta anaforyapan açık kırmızı renkli şarabın çanağadökülüşünü seyrediyordu. (Ibid, p.216)

2. Pablo’nun onun çömelip, çanağı yukarıtutuşunu ve çanağa hızla dolarken girdap meydanagetiren kırmızı şarabın akışını seyrediyordu.(Ibid, p.234)

3. Pablo durmuş, kızın eğilip çanağıdolduruşunu, kalkıp çanağı getirişiniseyrediyordu. Açık kırmızı şarap çanağın içineöyle hızlı dolmuştu ki çevrinti gibi ortasıçukurlaşmıştı. (Ibid, p.171)

4. Pablo onun diz çöküşünü, çanağı kaldırışınıizledi sonar kırmızı şarabın çok hızlı akışındanötürü dolarken oluşan fıkırdamayı izledi. (Ibid,p.226)

Seeing the changes in most of the words and patterns, a

comparatively freer expression of the translator’s

interpretation can be noticed in the first version of

translation. It is an example of a pragmatic translation. Such

words like ‘yukarı doğru’ and ‘renkli’ are used unnecessarily

in the same version and decrease its quality, though. The

phrase ‘Whirling motion’ has been translated as ‘anafor’,

‘girdap’, ‘çevrinti’ and ‘fıkırdama’ in respect. The last

translation is not the equivalent of the original at all.

(Çakır, 2006: 52-60)

The passage below which is extracted from Orwell’s ‘Animal

Farm’ has been translated both semantically and communicatively

39

so as to show the way the differences appear when translated

Semantically and Communicatively.

‘MR. JONES, of the Manor Farm, had locked thehen-houses for the night, but was too drunk toremember to shut the pop holes. With the ring oflight from his lantern dancing from side to side,he lurched across the yard, kicked off his bootsat the back door, drew himself a last glass ofbeer from the barrel in the scullery, and madehis way up to bed. Where Mrs. Jones was alreadysnoring.

As soon as the light in the bedroom went out,there was a stirring and a fluttering all throughthe farm buildings. Word had gone round duringthe day that old Major, the prize Middle Whiteboar, had had a strange dream on the previousnight and wished to communicate it to the otheranimals. It had been agreed that they should allmeet in the big barn as soon as Mr. Jones wassafely out of the way. Old Major (so he wascalled, though the name under which he had beenexhibited was Willindon Beauty) was so highlyregarded on the farm that everyone was quiteready to lose an hour’s sleep in order to hearwhat he had to say.’ (Animal Farm, 1945: 5).

40

Semantic Translation

Bay Jones, Manor çiftliğinin sahibi, o gecekümesleri kilitlemişti, ama tavukların giripçıktığı delikleri kapatmayı hatırlamayacak kadarsarhoştu. Fenerinin o yandan bu yana dans edenalevinin sesiyle, avluyu sendeleyerek geçti, arkakapıda botlarını tekmeleyerek fırlattı,bulaşıkhanedeki fıçıdan son kere bir bardaklıkbira aldı ve Bay Jones’un çoktan horlamayabaşladığı yatağın yolunu tuttu.

Yatak odasının ışığı söner sönmez, çiftliktekibinaların hepsinde bir telaş, bir hareket vardı.Yarı beyaz, ödüllü domuz olan Yaşlı Major’ın biregece önce tuhaf bir rüya gördüğü ve bunu diğerhayvanlara anlatacağı lafı gün boyunca dolandı.Bay Jones’in oradan uzaklaştığından emin olununcabütün hayvanların büyük samanlıkta toplanmalarıgerektiği fikrine varılmıştı. Yaşlı Major’a (adıbu; daha önce Wellingdon Güzeli olaraktanıtılmasına rağmen) öyle çok saygı duyulur kiherkes onun demek zorunda olduğu şeyi duymak içinuykularından bir saat kaybetmeye oldukça hazırdı.

Communicative Translation

Manor çiftliğinin sahibi Bay Jones, her geceyaptığı gibi kümeslerin kapısını kilitlemiş ancakepey içkili olduğu için tavukların girip çıktığıdelikleri kilitlemeyi unutmuştu. Elindeki feneriialevi dans ettirircesine, sallaya sallaya,sendeleyerek avluyu geçti, arka kapıya gelincedurup ayakkabılarını çıkarıp fırlattı.Bulaşıkhanedeki fıçıdan kendisine son bir biraaldı ve yatak odasının yolunu tuttu. Mrs. Jonesçoktan uyumuş, horlamaya bile başlamıştı.

41

Yatak odasının ışığı söner sönmez, bütünçiftliği bir telaş, bir hareket sardı. Kısmenbeyaz renkli ödüllü bir domuz olan Koca Major’ınbir gece önce tuhaf bir rüya gördüğü ve bunudiğer hayvanlarla paylaşacağı haberi, o günboyunca ağızdan ağıza dolaşmıştı. Bay Jones evineçekilir çekilmez bütün hayvanlar, büyüksamanlıkta toplanacaktı. Koca Major (asıl adıKoca Major ama panayırda ‘Wellingdon Güzeli’ diyetanıtılmıştı) çiftlikte öyle saygın bir mevkiyesahipti ki onun anlatacaklarını duyabilmek uğrunabütün hayvanlar uykularından bir saat feda etmeyehazırdı.

(Çakır, 2006: 52-60)

While studying the phrases written in italics, it is easy

to see that the phrases in the second version seem more

communicative and therefore more understandable for Turkish

readers. As in the first version, the translator does not find

it necessary to make the sentences longer because the readers

can easily understand and feel the purpose of the author.

Similarly in the second version, the phrases are expressed in

Turkish in the same way to be able to communicate with Turkish

readers.

Besides, such words like ‘bed’, ‘every’ must be expressed

with different words. The sentence ‘…made his way up to the

bed’ should be translated, into Turkish, as ‘yatak odasının

yolunu tuttu’, not as ‘yatağının yolunu tuttu’. The same

situation applies to the following sentence:

42

‘…everyone was quite ready to lose an hour’s sleep…. ‘The

word written in italic should not be translated as ‘herkes’ but

as ‘bütün hayvanları’. Because the animals are at stake in this

sentence, not the other people living on the farm. To prevent

any kind of ambiguity in the meaning, it should be translated

more communicatively as ‘bütün hayvanlar’.

Semantic translation does not create the same effect on

readers, particularly for the novels, as word-for-word

translation does. The translator should make comments on words,

or phrases or even sentences if need be in order to convey the

author’s emotions, state of mind, or what he intends to create

on the readership. On the other hand, it is impossible to do so

in literal translation in which the readers only read and

understand the passage but can not communicate with the author.

Yet, the initial intention of the author in the novels is to

communicate with his readers, not just to tell a story. Novels

are not scientific works, that’s why it is possible to see

figurative words or different phrases that must be translated

in the way the readers can easily understand and dream in their

own language, and this is possible only when they are

translated communicatively, not literally. That is the reason

of that Communicative Translation Method is preferred to

translate literary works like novels.

43

CONCLUSION

This study is a result of an attempt to briefly introduce

what translation is, the general purpose of translation, the

steps that should be followed during translation process and

different types of translation through presenting examples to

avoid possible translation problems. So as to achieve this

goal, we have completed the study in three chapters that are of

particular significance to a translator.

The role of cultural differences is also considered in

this study as one of the most important factors to be taken

into account on translation process. The translators should

know the source language culture and the differences among the

two languages to reflect the culture properly. They need to be

aware of the fact that translation is not only a matter of

transfer but also a place where cultures unite.

Different types of translation used in the work of

translation are concisely analysed in chapter II within a few

examples to make them clear and understandable. The examples

are studied in a comparative way between the types of

translation.

As the texts have hybrid natures, it is sometimes not

possible to decide which translation type might be preferred to

apply to a particular text. Various types of translation are

likely to be used in the same text.

44

Besides the types of translation to be selected, deciding

when, where and how to use these translation types according to

the text and the readers is a crucial responsibility of the

translators. They should turn the competence they have into the

performance in order to fulfil their duties to be a bridge

between the author and the readers of the target language.

The third chapter proceeds with the application of

knowledge suggested in the previous chapters to actual

practice. Different translated variations of some texts are

analysed and possible solutions to make an appropriate and a

consistent translation are suggested.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOASE – BEIER, J. (2011) A Critical Introduction to Translation

Studies, Continuum International Publishing Group

ÇAKIR, A. (1992) The Organization and Testing of a Course for Teaching

Translation Including Simultaneous Translation

ÇAKIR, A. (2006) Teaching Translation, Nüve Kültür Merkezi

Yayınları.

GÜN, Y. (2010) A Comparative Study of Communicative and Semantic

Translation Methods

45

HATİM, B. (2001) Teaching and Researching Translation, Pearson

Education

KALAY, N. (2005) Advanced Translation Practice, Nobel Yayın

Dağıtım

KÜÇÜKBEZİRCİ, Y. (2007) Theories and Practice of Translation, Eğitim

Kitabevi Yayınları

LARSON, Mildred L. (1998) Meaning-Based Translation, University

Press of America.

MACMILLAN DICTIONARY (2008)

MUNDAY, J. (2001) Introducing Translation Studies, Routledge.

NEWMARK, P. (1981) Approaches to Translation, Oxford: Pergamon

Press.

NEWMARK, P. (1988) A Textbook of Translation, Prentice Hall

International

NEWMARK, P. (1991) About Translation, Cromwell Press Ltd.

ÖZKUL, M. (2011) Translation Process: Transferring Culture or Adaptation

ROBINSON, D. (2003) Becoming a Translator, Routledge NY

SNELL - HORNBY, M. (2006) Translation Studies, John Benjamins

B.V.

SOFER, M. (2002) The Translator’s Handbook, Schreiber

Publishing, Inc.

YILMAZ, F. (2004) A Study on Error Analysis in the Use of Collocations

and Idiomatic Expressions in Sentence Translation from Turkish to

English

46