Traduccion

1.4. Speech and translation.

After this small but complex exposition, we must to point out the importance of this ideas in relation with the practice of the translation. If of all this it is discover in the language as a communicative act, as a process and as product, and s cognitive procedure, what is translate in something else more than words than words and phrases; inferences, “impligances”, presuppositions, speech signers… What related to this elements with the translation? What process we must to follow? How it is translate this elements? Hartmann warmed about the difficulty of the translation, if not it is consider the discursive elements. The first work in the translation belong to in recognize the discursive reality that configure the linguistic materiality. The translation of not proportional sentences, as the respects, it is lose a pragmatic essential semanticism, or gain lexicon superfluo semanticism, about it is understand the discursives and contextuals realities.

In spanish, buenas noches, in front to french, bonne soir/ english, nuit, or good evening/night, or in arabic, salam aleikhum, or in Hebrew shalom. The translation can’t be literal, of lexicon level. There are terms that shows a determinatives uses.

The mood of receive an order in english Yes, sir! Or Aye. Sir!, or in spanish, ¡A la orden! What happened if it is translate in spanish, the military voice like “si, señor”? Just, that the pragmatic fail.

Two cases of literary translation illustrate this pragmatic difficulties of translation. In first place a traduction in prose of a script written in turkish, a collection of tales written in Turkish, Tutkulu bir Estambul Uclemesi, by A Didem Uslu, published in 1992, and it´s translation in English, A passionate trilogy of Istanbul, the English text appears full of Turkish terms, some of common use in our languages and other ones unknown: pasha, Kapalicars (in a note of the translator, "the old covered bazaar of Istanbul"), fez, effendi, Hidrellez (beginning of the Turkish Gypsies's festival), Azrael (the angel of death), hodja (Muslim priest), Kader, an own name in English that means destiny, hado, in a case where a concept is repeated, Iman Bayildi (a dish of eggplant with onion and oil, called the "hodja fainted", because when seen the amount of oil he fainted, according to the tradition), trousseau (used as group of historical academic documents), night of kina, (hennaldeña) on the toes and feet of the bride before the wedding, assure, cereal dessert, tükenmez (fruit juice), haciyamatz, (“tentetieso”), the crazy Dumrul (character of the Turkish tradition who returns with the angel of death), the contextual reference to garlic with the sense of the Turkish saying which when someone gets married, and when eating garlic, the smell comes out 40 days apart "even though the monkey dresses up in silk, monkey she still" (¿), the truth cannot be hidden.

This examples appear with an explanation, in a note at the page bottom, to transcend the social, cultural and discursive reality that the original language possesses and that shall be picked up by the translated language. The conclusion is one question. To what point is it necessary to make an explanation in form of a note? Wouldn´t it be a noted edition? Which criteria they follow to exclude or include concrete terms, or translate them directly? For example, fez, red hat.

The second case is about poetry, the translation of the book by R.M. RiLKE Duineser Elegien, Rober de Beaugrande, Factors in a theory of poetic translating.Ase: Van Gorcum 1978. The difficulty of translation is shown here in the complexity of the metaphor, it is understanding, and the unexpected linguistic resource which makes a self-speech in the metaphoric fields. This implies the interpreted from the metaphor, as seen in the metaphor Perlen

...