منابع پایان نامه با موضوع Translation، interest

Finally, the number of parentheses in each translation was counted and shown in separate tables according to the translators’ gender. The result of the study was consistent with the well-known views that women use shorter sentences, that the vocabulary of a woman is much less extensive than that of a man and that women use more parenthesis than men.
Vetr Shiraz in her article “Translation strategies: A gender-based approach” reveal the nature of relations between male/female translations in respect of some linguistic features through 1) examining the male and female translation’s characteristics, which have to do with given linguistic features regardless of the gender of the source texts’ writers, and 2) determining their difference, if it is the case in translation of a woman’s work. These linguistic features include sentence structure, sentence length, and lexical density, which quantitatively have been determined. In other words, the research set out to study the employed strategies by male/female translators with a gender based approach. The corpus of the study consists of equal samples of four fictions, each translated by an Iranian man and an Iranian woman from English into Persian. The research has used text-linguistic analysis to compare men translations of four English fictions with women translations of those very books. The t-test has been applied to compare the means of performance of the two groups to determine how much the researcher can be confident that the differences found between two groups are not due to chance. The observed differences with respect to the percentages of different types of sentence and the number of clauses in compound and complex sentences separately as well as compound and complex sentences in total, are found to be statistically non-significant. The difference between male/female translation in respect of sentence length and lexical density is also found to be non-significant. No relationship is found between women language in translation of a woman’s work that predicts their gender.
Nemati in her article “Gender Differences in the Use of Linguistic Forms in the Speech of Men and Women”: A comparative study of Persian and English intended to determine
Whether men and women were different with respect to the use of intensifiers, hedges and tag questions in English and Persian. To conduct the study, R. Lakoff’s (1975) ideas concerning linguistic differences between males and females were taken into account. In order to gather the most natural-like data, 6 English and 8 Persian film-scripts with a family and social theme were randomly selected from amongst all the scenarios available in two libraries of the University of Shiraz. In all, 9,280 utterances were studied. The data were then divided into four major groups: (1) cross gender, same culture, (2) same gender, cross culture; (3) cross gender, cross culture; and (4) cross culture data. The results of the 21 Chi-squares computed showed no significant difference between the groups on the use of intensifiers, hedges and tag questions. The findings of the study did not confirm Lakoff’s opinion regarding gender-bound language at least in the three areas and the corpus inspected in this research.
Golavar (2009) in his article “The Effect of the Translator’s Gender on Translation Evaluation” investigate the relationship between the gender of a translator and the gender of the evaluator of the work of that translator. The researcher hypothesizes that if a male rater is to evaluate a translated text done by both a man and a woman, he would unconsciously choose the translation of the same gender and vice versa. To test this hypothesis, 6o (30 men and 30 women) senior students of the translation training program at the Maritime University of Chabahar were selected and participated in the experiment. The test included 20 questions; it was designed based on two translations of one chapter of a short story which was translated one by a male and the other by a female translator from English to Persian. Two of the answer options were the translations of the two translators and the others were wrong translations. The subjects were asked to choose just the one which was nearest to their own opinions. Finally, the data analysis of the study showed that the relationship between the variables of the study was not proved and the research hypothesizes was rejected. The limitations and implications of this study, as well as its suggestions for future research, are discussed.
Federici and Leonardi (2012) in their article “Using and Abusing Gender in Translation, The Case of Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own Translated into Italian” which is part of a corpus-based research on gender in translation aimed at showing how gender is used and/or abused in the translation of literary texts from English into Italian. Drawing upon feminist theories of language and translation and feminist practices in translation, it is our intention to show how gender is manipulated in translation in an attempt to define feminist translation strategies. Translating a feminist text does not necessarily imply that the translator working on that text is a feminist. In Italy, moreover, it is very hard to find cases of declared feminist translators as compared to other countries, such as Canada or Spain for instance. Our interest, therefore, lies in the possibility to frame specific strategies as feminist and to see if in the corpus of texts we are analyzing they are carried out or not. The second part of the essay focuses on the first example of our study: Virginia Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own and three of the translations that have been published in the Italian context.
Elraz in his articles “His Translation vs. Her Translation – Gender and Translation” (2006) concentrating on gender-oriented characteristics in formal contexts, taken from the British National Corpus (Koppel et al. 2003). While these studies all deal with original writing, the one reported here explores potential differences in the language of men and women who translate the words of others, whether in writing or orally. To my knowledge, it is the first empirical study in this domain which compares translations by males and by females.In light of the gender-oriented differences observed in spoken and in written language, similar differences were expected in translated texts as well. These were assumed to include vocabulary (particularly the use of hedges and of words that do not have an obvious equivalent in the target language), elicitation, omissions, additions, register etc. Specifically, it was hypothesized that (1) gender-oriented characteristics will be manifested in the translations and will serve as an indication of the translator’s gender; (2) characteristics manifested in written translation will also be manifested in simultaneous interpretation.The study consisted of two parts. The written one focused on textual elements in the text that were expected to generate features reflecting differences between female and male translations. The text in which they appeared was submitted to an equal number of male and female translators working from Hebrew into either English or Spanish. The oral part consisted of two 1,600-word texts interpreted (simultaneously) from English into Hebrew by four professional interpreters, two women and two men.
2.4. Translation and accuracy
Accuracy can be considered as one of the representations of the faithfulness in translation, i.e. showing how accurately the translator has managed to reproduce the message of the ST into the TL; it means how faithful s/he has been to the message of the source text in conveying it to the target text (Ghodrati, 1388, 2009 A.D. p.44).
Newmark (1996, p.111) believes that in translating a text, “the accuracy relates to the SL text, either to the author’s meaning, or to the objective truth that is encompassed by the text”, etc.
As Newmark (1996, p.25) states, translation is a process of filling up the gaps which may exist between languages. He determines two purposes for translation which are ‘accuracy’ and ‘economy’ (Newmark 1996: 43). In Newmark’s opinion (1996: 111), a good translation should be as accurate as possible, as economical as possible, not only denotatively and connotatively, but also referentially and pragmatically. He believes that the concept of accuracy is relevant to the source language text, i.e. to the meaning intended by author, to the objective truth embedded in the text, or the objective truth which is related to the readership intellectual and emotional understanding expected by the translator. In fact, a good translation is the one by which the translator can realize two purposes of the translation: accuracy and economy, as mentioned above.
Barnwell introduces three most significant characteristics for a good translation: accuracy, clarity, and naturalness. She believes that “accuracy” is of the greatest importance and defines it as: “correct exegesis of the source message and transfer of the meaning of that message as exactly as possible into the receptor language” (Barnwell 1980: 15).
Larson (1984: 485), like Barnwell (1980: 15), believes that in every translation, accuracy, clearness and naturalness are of the most importance. Regarding the translation accuracy, she believes that in some cases, when the translator tries to get the meaning of the ST and convey it to the TT, s/he may make some mistakes, either in the analysis of the ST, or in the process of conveying the meaning, and a different meaning may result; then, there is a need for a careful check regarding the

تکه های دیگری از این پایان نامه را می توانید

در شماره بندی فوق بخوانید

متن کامل پایان نامه ها در سایت homatez.com موجود است

You may also like...

Add a Comment