 |
 |
|
Aditi
Ghosh
|
|
Aditi Ghosh is a research
scholar doing a PhD on computational lexicography
at the Centre for Applied Linguistics and
Translation Studies,
University of Hyderabad,
Hyderabad 500046
She is reachable at
aditiphd@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
tyle in literature- the 'style' of literary
texts -has been the focus of many a discourse, quite understandably.
The style reflected in a particular piece of writing (whatever
the form of writing it may be) tells us about the author,
|
|
and is, in many cases, identified as his/her style. Why then
is the style of a translated text not considered the translator's
style? The reasons are several:
|
|
| (1) |
The translator's job is to present the style of the original
author, and not to create a style of his own. |
| (2) |
The
translation should read like an original, and thereby
the translator's identity is supposed to be shrouded in
the dark. |
| (3) |
Nida's
contribution to Translation Studies is by no means regarded
insignificant. In his opinion, the translated text should
produce the same effect on the receptor audience as the
original text has on the source language audience. This
being the case, Nida suggests that changes be made in
order to produce this effect (Nida and Taber 1969, 20). |
| (4) |
In
more cases than not, the translated work is not evaluated-compared
with the original-to understand to what extent it resembles
the original work. |
|
What the translator does, or should do,
is to get transformed into the author of the original and
with all his/her mind, will and soul, and also ponder the
problem of how to transform the shape, gait, style and all
other features, and how to express them. The purpose is
to make something written in one language well represented
in another.
|
The translator's job thus is accompanied
by an enormous responsibility, and also runs a lot of risk.
In the process, he/she falls, as Newmark points out, 'a
victim of a constant tension between the acts of overtranslation
and undertranslation'. (Newmark 1981, 7-8).
|
| There
is also the eternally pervasive question of 'fidelity' of the
translator. |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
