1. Introduction
History
acts as the ultimate repository where minor histories converge and blend.
Everything has its history, documenting its activities from the very beginning
to the very end, whether it be a living being, a place, or a word. "To
translate" is a term that warrants its own history and must be examined
within its cultural context to understand its cultural role, discover its
inherent dynamism, and grasp its purpose. To fully comprehend the term "to
translate," it is essential to explore its history (including its
etymology and evolution) and reflect on its significant milestones to question
and analyse it. In the European context, the term has passed through five main
stages that have simultaneously contributed to shaping the concept of
translation, both in theory and practice, as it is recognised and regarded
today.
2. "To Translate",
in the Time of the Greeks
Historians
believe that the Greeks of the classical era showed little interest in
translating the works of neighbouring cultures and civilisations during their
dominance over the ancient world. However, two ancient Greek terms related to
(written and verbal) translation were used to denote two aspects of
“translation”: translating and interpreting, or hermeneuein and meîapherein.
These two terms have endured in modern Romance languages and Anglo-Saxon
languages, referring respectively to hermeneutics and metaphor.
Later,
during Plutarch's era, the term "metaphrazein" first emerged and
appeared closely related to "paraphrase," a term now used very
frequently. As a result, the Greeks seem to have defined translation within
three domains: the domain of metaphor (transfer of meaning), the domain of
interpretation (hermeneutics), and the domain of reformulation (paraphrasing),
with the potential to associate translation with any one of these activities
and fields.
3. "To Translate",
in the Time of the Romans
Unlike
the Greeks, who neglected translation and overlooked neighbouring
civilisational efforts, the Romans established Rome as the centre of
translation in the West, helping to make the West the birthplace and cradle of
translation ever since.[2] From the very beginning, the Romans understood that
translation demanded effort, involving reading, understanding, interpreting,
and rendering a text from its source language into Latin. However, the
challenge was increased when Roman translators and scholars faced a lack of
terminology to express their views in translation.
Initially,
the concept of translation activity in the Roman era lacked a specific term to
denote it or to distinguish it from other mental activities. It did not have a
noun to refer to it or a verb to describe its function. According to the German
grammarian Lohmann, the concept of translation first emerged with the Roman
philosopher, writer, and orator Cicero, who, in the absence of a specific
concept or term for translation during his time, introduced several verbs and
terms to describe translation, such as vertere, convertere, exprimere, verbum e
verbo, ad verbum exprimere, reddere, verbum pro verbo reddere... [3]
Some
additional Roman terms, such as interpres and transferre, became widely used by
the end of the Roman Empire. Interpres was employed to denote both translator
and interpreter. The other Latin verb indicating translation,
"transferre", was used to signify transfer and conversion. The verb
"transferre" was a compound of "trans-" (across) +
"ferre" (to carry). The present active infinitive (main verb) was
"transferre", meaning "to carry across" or "to
transfer". The past participle (or perfect passive participle) was
"translatus", meaning "having been carried across" or
"transferred" when used in passive constructions. The present
participle was "transferens", and the gerund was
"transferentis", meaning "carrying across" or
"transferring".
While the correct classical Latin verb was
"transferre" (to carry across, transfer, translate), the past
participle was "translatus" (used in perfect passive constructions).
The frequentative form "translatare" developed later, likely due to
Vulgar Latin or Medieval usage. In Italian, "traslatare" meant
"to transfer" or "to shift,"
derived from Latin "transferre". Consequently, of the two Roman
terms, "interpres" and "transferre," which were widely used
by the end of Antiquity, only one established itself and continued through to
the Middle Ages, prevailing over the other terms: the noun translatio (meaning:
"translation") and the verb translatare (meaning: "to
translate"). Nonetheless, the term "translatio" was not used
solely to denote translation. It was employed to indicate various other
activities simultaneously. Translatio could mean the transfer, transport,
change, conversion, removal, or conveyance of people, objects, thoughts,
metaphors, rights, or properties from one individual to another, from one body
to another, from one place to another, and from one language to another. In
other words, 'translatio,' in Latin, can refer to various transfers and
conversions, both tangible and intangible, as well as literal and symbolic
movements.[4]
4. "To Translate",
in the Middle Ages
In the
Middle Ages, the term "translation" in its Latin context was used to
mean transport, transfer, change, transposition, transition, and conversion,
much as it had in Antiquity. Due to this semantic plurality, the Latin Middle
Ages developed the concept of Translatio Studii. However, despite the dominance
of "translation" in European Medieval texts, it could not prevail
over other terms or establish itself as a single, unique term invariably
associated with the act of translating.[5]
Indeed,
the Medieval French language, or Old French, featured many verbs that were as
common as the verb "to translate". For instance, there were espondre,
turner, mettre en romanz, enromanchier, translater [6] before the French verb
"traduire" emerged in the early sixteenth century AD, originating
from Italy, passing through France, reaching other Romance languages (Spanish,
Catalan, Portuguese and Romanian), and settling in their cultures, along with
the noun "traduction".
Unlike
Romance languages, English retained the Medieval term, "Translation",
clung to it, and officially adopted it as the sole term in the field,
developing around it a typically English perspective toward translation, best
known later as "literal translation", or "word-for-word
translation", or "direct translation", or "overt
translation", or "linguistic translation", etc. Thus, the
Medieval term, Translation, has remained common and established in the English
language to this day.
5. The Term "Translation"
in the European Renaissance
Although
"traduire" and "traduction" became common in early
16th-century France, they had been in use since the 15th century but were
initially confined to legal contexts, as shown in phrases like "il a été
traduit en justice" (meaning: "He was brought to the court").
The use of these terms for linguistic translation originated from a
misinterpretation by the Italian humanist Leonardo Bruni, who, willingly or
unwillingly, while attempting to translate Aulu-Gelle's Vocabulum graecum vetus
traductum in linguam romanam (Noctes, I, 18, 1) [Latin Loans from Romance
Languages], translated the verb "tradūcĕre" as if it were
"tradurre" (meaning: "to translate"). However, the context
of the passage indicated that the Latin verb "tradūcĕre" meant
"to introduce," "to convey," or "to insert."
Bruni's
translational error at the beginning of the 16th century sparked the interest
of European Renaissance humanists. It was quickly embraced by translators and
scholars who understood the newly coined term (neologism) and adopted it as a
distinctive word representing a concept unique to a new discipline, worthy of
the autonomy gained by the arts, sciences, and letters during the Renaissance
period.
Since
the early decades of the Renaissance, specific fields of knowledge have
asserted their independence from philosophy and literature, much like the field
of criticism. Other fields have sought independence from encyclopaedism, such
as the experimental sciences. Additionally, some areas have distanced
themselves from astrology and superstition, as astronomy did. Some have also
claimed independence from morality, similar to politics. Furthermore, others
have gone even further by declaring independence from religion. In this
context, it was logical that translation might have a demand to reveal: to be
independent of all the spheres of knowledge with which translation interacts,
as the latter was viewed as part of the field being translated.
That is,
Leonardo Bruni's translation error occurred within its appropriate historical
context. This justifies the 16th-century humanists' immediate adoption of
Bruni's term. The objective set in Bruni's era was to establish a new
environment where translation could flourish and operate freely, conveying the
essence of human cultures from one language to another and utilising new tools
against the backdrop of a new philosophy that offers translation the expected
independence from other fields of knowledge, which were prone to dissolving it,
possessing it to the extent of annulment, to the point of obliteration.
6. The Term "Translation"
in Modern Times
6.1. French and the
Transition from "Translater" to "Traduire"
The
English verb "to translate" corresponds to two different verbs in
French: "translater" and "traduire". In terms of usage, the
first term, "translater", predates the second. However, during the
European Renaissance, society began to assign certain tasks to the newer term,
"traduire", which focused almost entirely on the development of early
translation theory and careful translation practice. Meanwhile, the older term,
"translater", retained the remaining tasks related to issues outside
translation, mainly in the fields of biology, mathematics, and astronomy.
6.1.1. In the Beginning
Was "Translater"
Since
the Middle Ages, the terms "translater" and "translation"
have been widely used in French, anchoring the original Latin meanings of these
words within French linguistic usage, even as they expanded to include
additional scientific and technical meanings. However, they generally retain
the sense of "to transfer" from one language to another, from one
location to another, or from one time to another. Sometimes, the term implies
"to carry" (e.g., "translater la croix": to carry the
cross). Other times, it means "to relocate" (e.g., "translater
un prisonnier”: to relocate a prisoner). Additionally, it refers to "to
transfer financial or real estate". Finally, it denotes changing an
appointment, amending a date, or postponing it.
In the
first edition of his dictionary, published in 1679, Pierre Richelet clearly
stated that the term "translater" was not used outside the religious
sphere in the French context. It referred to the transfer, relocation, and
movement of clergy and church property, as well as the postponement and delay
of church activities.[8]
In the
19th century, Émile Littré's dictionary excluded the religious usage of
"translater," which had been included in Richelet's dictionary two
centuries earlier. It also strengthened the term's exclusion from cultural
usage, leading to "translater" being sometimes seen as an old and
obsolete word. At other times, it also referred to "poor and base
translation," with the term "translateur" meaning "bad and
poor translator."
With
Émile Littré's dictionary, new administrative and scientific meanings were
added to the term "translater". The administrative meaning appears in
"to transfer a prisoner from one correctional institution to
another," "to move the capital of a state from one city to
another," and "to transfer ownership from one name to another."
Concerning the scientific meaning in Émile Littré's dictionary (physical and
mathematical usage), the term "translater" came to denote the
rotation of physical bodies in space around another body or the sliding and
gliding of mathematical geometric shapes on design paper.
On the
technical front, the terms "translater" and "translation"
now have different meanings. In astronomy, "translater" refers to the
"revolution" of planets around a star, unlike the other movement of
planets in space, "rotation" (“tourner autour d'un axe": to
rotate around an axis), which describes the rotation of planets on their axes.
In geometry, the term describes a geometric transformation that aligns with the
idea of moving an object a certain distance without changing its size,
direction, or reflection. In computer science, the term pertains to converting
a computer programme, with any necessary modifications, to ensure references to
addresses are correct so the programme can run from its new location without
issues.
In
brief, the term "translater" in the French context has kept its Latin
meanings (to move, relocate, or reschedule) for religious purposes and the
transfer of prisoners or property until the 17th century. In Pierre Richelet's
1679 dictionary, the term was reserved for religious contexts. Later, in Émile
Littré's 19th-century dictionary, the meaning shifted to administrative and
scientific contexts (e.g., transfers, relocations, revolutions, slidings,
etc.). Today, the French term "translater" specialises in non-linguistic
uses only, leaving the linguistic uses to the other term, "traduire."
6.1.2. Then, There Came
"Traduire"
The
first use of the term "tradurre" during the European Renaissance as a
synonym for the medieval Latin word "translatare" originated in
Italy, then spread to France. The other Romance languages in Europe adopted it
later. The verb "traduire" was first used in French in 1509, where it
occasionally appeared alongside the then-current verb "translater"
within the same paragraph of the same text and context, as documented in the
works of Jehan Divry. The interchangeable use of "traduire" and
"translater” demonstrates that the two terms were synonymous in French
when referring to "translation" before the Latin word
"translater" was replaced by the newly coined term
"traduire." This was emphasised in Richelet's dictionary in 1679,
where he regarded the term "translation" as an old and obsolete word
that once meant "translation."
Since
the 16th century, the terms "traduire" and "translater"
have shared the meanings of "transfer" rooted in their Latin origins.
While the verb "translater" has primarily been used in physical
contexts such as scientific and technical transfer, "traduire" has
specialised in the symbolic aspects of transfer, meaning "to bring before
the courts" or "to appear before justice," and signifying
"to reverse" the surface to "reveal" and
"express" the deeper essence. It also implies "to
interpret" and "to explain." The final symbolic transfer
associated with "traduire" is the translation of speech, text, or a
collection of works by an author from a source language to a target language.
By
examining French dictionaries from the Renaissance to the present day, one can
closely trace the development of the term chosen to denote translation and the
evolution of the underlying concept. In Richelet's dictionary at the end of the
17th century, the term denoted both "to convert into a language different
from the first language in the original version" and "to plead in
court." [11] In the dictionary of the French Academy, the term
"traduire" monopolised all meanings associated with translation and transformation.
It meant "to convert a written work from one language to another," as
well as "to render" someone in a different image or form. [12] It
also meant "to transport people from one place to another." Here,
"traduire” intersects with "translater" but does not fully
coincide with it. [13] At the end of the 19th century, Émile Littré's
dictionary reinforced the legal meaning of the French term. In addition to
"transporting, relocating, and transferring suspects, accused persons,
prisoners, and detainees," the term came to mean "to appear in the
courts," traduire en justice. [14]
At the
beginning of the 20th century, Le Grand Larousse encyclopédique (in ten
volumes) broadened the term's meanings to include "representation",
"expression", "interpretation", and "indication of
something".[15] The le Grand Robert de la langue Française morphologically
breaks down the French term "traduire” into trans, meaning
"beyond", and ducere, meaning to "lead" and to
"convey", such that "traduire" denotes the transfer to a
different culture and the conveyance to a different language.[16]
While
Pierre Richelet limited the term's scope within an ecclesiastical context,
Claude Augé, in his Grand Larousse encyclopédique, defined two domains for it.
The first is cultural, where the term refers to the act of translation. The
second relates to the legal, legislative, and judicial aspects of the transfer,
relocation, and movement of accused persons, suspects, prisoners, and
detainees.
The
French Robert dictionary includes four entries related to translation: the act
of translating and its result, a translated version of the original, the
corresponding word in the source or target language, and the material
expression of something immaterial, as in the sentence: "In the spread of
crime, a translation of insecurity." Additionally, the term also signifies
"appearing before the court and the law." [17]
Over
time, "traduire" gained dominance over "translater" and
"traduction" prevailed over "translation". This can be
attributed to two factors. The first factor is that "traduction"
belongs to a distinct linguistic family comprising ductio and the verb ducere,
which correspond to "to lead" and "to drive". This family
includes words such as Induction, Déduction, Production, and Reproduction,
which encompass the four systems of transformation. Induction is prominent in
experimental fields, such as chemistry, while Déduction holds relevance in
logical-mathematical domains and similar disciplines. Production is prevalent
across various practical fields, including economics and technology.
"Traduction" predominates in the realm of transforming texts of all
kinds, whether human or machine-generated, written or spoken, literal or
figurative. All four systems share the characteristic that they end in
-duction.[18]
The
second factor contributing to the dominance of "traduction" over
"translation" in the French context since the Renaissance is the
dynamism and expressiveness of the former term compared to the latter. While
"translation" emphasises transfer or conversion,
"traduction" underscores the energy and activity underpinning this
movement of transfer, which can be described as the transformative force (la
force transformante). More precisely, "traduction" signifies an
intentional, conscious, and deliberate process, presupposing the existence of
an agent, much like all words containing "-duction". In contrast,
"translation" represents merely an anonymous process of crossing.[19]
6.2. English Language and Loyalty to the Term "to
Translate"
The
Oxford English Dictionary (full title: A New English Dictionary on Historical
Principles), a twenty-volume work, is highly regarded among contemporary
dictionaries for being the largest in both size and quality. It uses an
approach different from that established by Arab lexicographers since the 8th
century AD. This dictionary employs an alphabetical order of entries, unlike
the root-based order still used by Arabic dictionaries today. Furthermore, it
improves its presentation of linguistic items by including phonetic
transcriptions of words, which was uncommon in other European dictionaries at
the time. In contrast, Arabic dictionaries use vowelisation or discretisation
to ensure correct pronunciation.
The
Oxford English Dictionary also adopted a historical method focused on tracing
the origins of words, similar to how records are kept for individuals and
families in real life. This approach revitalised linguistic entries, moving
away from the absolutism that once dominated and still persists in other
dictionaries. It also embraced the chance to broaden explanations by including
proverbs, maxims, sayings, and common expressions, while also citing poetic
verses or writers' expressions, referencing the source where the quoted phrase
appeared. Essentially, it was primarily a corpus-based method.
French
lexicographers initially suggested this choice during discussions concerning
the project for the first French dictionary, the Dictionary of the French
Academy, in the reign of King Louis XIV in the 17th century. However, they
ultimately rejected it, only to revisit it in the 18th century and incorporate
it in subsequent editions.
The
Oxford English Dictionary is credited with shifting lexicographical efforts
from the era of voluntary individual endeavour, which characterised the Arab
lexicographical experience since the publication of the first dictionary during
the Abbasid era (beginning with Al-Jawhari, and including Ibn Duraid,
Al-Asqalani, Al-Zubaidi, Al-Fayruzabadi, Al-Fayyumi, Al-Safadi, Al-Nawawi,
Al-Qali, Al-Azhari, Al-Suyuti, Kra' al-Naml, Ibn Sidah, Al-Rumi, Al-Dimashqi,
Al-Razi, Al-Saghani, and Ibn Manzur, among others), to an era of organised
institutional action. In the 19th century, the Philological Society in Oxford
appointed James Murray as supervisor of this project, which spanned over
twenty-seven years. Work on the dictionary began in 1857 and finished in 1884.
Perhaps the most noteworthy contribution from the team was its collaboration
with other scholars, writers, artists, and clergy, while avoiding the pitfalls
of encyclopaedism that could divert it from its primary linguistic focus. From
the outset, the team welcomed contributions from philologists and scholars in
comparative and historical linguistics, as well as others from various
disciplines, until the Oxford Dictionary was regarded as a second major shift
in lexicographical work, following the first Arab shift that established this
field ten centuries prior to the development of the British Oxford Dictionary.
The
Oxford English Dictionary traces the origin of the term "to
translate" in the history of the English language, pinpointing its Latin
roots. The Byzantines of the Middle Ages inherited various uses of the term
"to translate" from the ancient Romans, denoting both translation and
transfer, specifically "transferre," the present active infinitive
form. In contrast, the past participle form was "translatus," which,
in the 11th century AD, evolved into a new independent Latin verb meaning
"transfer" and "translation": "translatare." With
the rise of vernacular European languages, the term "translatare"
transitioned from Latin to the emerging Western languages, such as English,
which has adopted the verb "to translate" to this day.[20]
The
English verb "to translate," as defined by the Oxford English
Dictionary, denotes the act of moving or transferring across various fields,
from physical to figurative, including scientific and literary contexts. The
primary physical sense involves transfer, relocation, and movement, often
referring to professionals, craftsmen, clergy, and prisoners being moved from
one location to another. The figurative sense relates to the transfer of ideas,
emotions, hopes, and dreams (e.g., "divine transfer," "the ascension
of prophets," "transfer of the remains of the dead from one place to
another" for honour or vengeance, etc.). In physics, “to translate"
describes a physical body orbiting another or rotating about its axis. In
geometry, "to translate" refers to moving geometric shapes by sliding
them across a surface. Lastly, in literary terms, it pertains to "the
transfer of written texts from one language to another." [21]
The
American Heritage Dictionary offers additional subordinate meanings of the
English verb "to translate." The first is "to express in another
language while retaining the original meaning." The second is "to
explain and interpret using simple words." The third is "to convert
from one form to another and from one style to a different style." The
fourth is "to work in translation."[22] In other words, translation,
according to the American Heritage Dictionary, is a profession in which the
practitioner can either focus on translating form or content.
Webster's
Dictionary, the well-known American dictionary, lists several meanings for the
noun "translation" and the verb "to translate": the act of
translating, the state of being translated, a translated product, a translated
version of a text (in the fields of humanities), the transfer of people or the
transfer of corpses or human remains (ecclesiastical glossary), the transfer of
property (rare usage), the transfer of rights, conversion and transformation,
the revolution of a body around another body (in the field of physics), and the
sliding of geometric shapes (in the field of mathematics).[23]
The
semantic range of the term "translation" in its Anglo-Saxon context
may appear richer and broader than its French counterpart, as noted by Antoine
Berman. It may also seem more capable of expressing both concrete and
figurative transformations and conversions, which is only achieved in French by
using the term "traduction" metaphorically. However, it would be
unreasonable to compare the French term "traduire" with the English
term "to translate", knowing that the latter encompasses the meanings
of both French terms altogether, "translater" and
"traduire". The difference between the French and English terms, in
the context of translation studies, extends far beyond the richness and
abundance of semantic meaning.
It is
no coincidence that the English language has retained the original Latin term,
"translation." This is closely linked to the concept established by
Anglo-Saxon culture since the Middle Ages, when the pattern that the English
language was to follow aimed to facilitate communication by adopting a
terminological system inspired by everyday language, which has always been
regarded as "translation."[24] This choice stems from an early
functional and communicative orientation in Anglo-Saxon cultures. As early as
the 14th century, thinkers such as Nicolas Oresme considered translation to be
part of a broader system of communication. Thus, English developed into a
language of exchange, or even one that embodies a form of translation,
characterised by adaptability and lexical flexibility.
Thus,
the English language appears, in its essence, as translation. For this reason,
translation holds central significance in this particular language, which has
become, firstly, the primary medium for producing the term (or the specialised
signifier capable of conversion and translation); secondly, it has emerged as
the fundamental medium for technological communication worldwide, with English
serving as a model language for other languages seeking to become languages of
connection and communication; and thirdly, English has assumed the role of the
primary medium for transferring written texts in what has come to be termed
"distant languages" (such as Chinese, Hindi, and Japanese), by
Westernising their texts and transforming their meanings to facilitate
generalisation.[26]
In
modern times, since Spanish is a phonetic language that is read as it is
written and vice versa, English has become the chief language of translation.
This development arises from its foundation on a self-conception based on a
pure system of interchangeable and exchangeable signs. As a result, every
translation within the Anglo-Saxon context is necessarily influenced by the
concept of "translation" as defined seven centuries ago by Nicolas
Oresme (1320 - 1382). In other words, English does not truly translate.
Instead, it replaces a word from its source language with a word from the
target language and vice versa. That is, it generalises the content of a
translatable nature.
The
term "to translate" has several meanings in English, but the core
meaning, which shapes the image of translation in the Anglo-Saxon context, is
the one used in physics. While Arabic uses a single verb "دَارَ، يَدُور،
دَوَرَانًا" (dāra, yadūru, dawarān - to rotate, to revolve, rotation)
to describe the rotation of a planet firstly around itself and secondly around
another star that forms the nucleus of a hypothetical solar system, English
employs two verbs. The first is "to rotate," signifying a planet's
movement around its axis. The second is "to orbit" or "to
revolve," indicating a planet's movement around a star that is at the
centre of the solar system. This suggests that in English, each word is
regarded as a planet. When a word "rotates" around its axis, the
opposite side, previously hidden, becomes visible — just as the other side of a
rotating planet becomes visible through light and darkness, or proximity and
distance. These two sides, which alternately appear and disappear as planets
revolve in space or words move in a text, are what linguists call the original
word in the source language and the corresponding word in the target language.
Essentially, English assumes that every word in one language must have an
equivalent in another language. To "translate" a word is simply to
rotate it so that we can see its counterpart in the other language.
7. "Dragoman": Origin and Evolution in the
Western Context
The
dragoman was known in ancient Latin as Interpres, a word made up of two parts:
inter, meaning "between," which signifies mediation and connections,
and pretium, meaning "price" or "value." The term
“interpres" firstly referred to a "mediator"; secondly, a "messenger"
or "envoy"; thirdly, an "explainer" or
"commentator"; and finally, a "translator" or
"dragoman."[28]
The
Arabic word "tarjumān" or "turjumān" (meaning
"dragoman”) was also used in European languages from the Middle Ages to
the 18th century. In Italy, the dragoman was called "dragomanno." In
Turkey, Persia, and other parts of the East, "drogman" was a title
given to individuals who translated at their country's consulates and embassies
abroad until the end of the 19th century.[29] The term "dragoman" was
also used in various languages, including German, Swedish, Spanish, Dutch,
Polish, Romanian, and English.
Dictionaries
of Western languages indicate that the word "dragoman" has Arabic
origins. For instance, Merriam-Webster's dictionary states: The term
"Dragoman" specifically refers to a professional interpreter in Near
Eastern countries. The first recorded use of the word in English dates back to
the fourteenth century.
The
Oxford English Dictionary confirms the statement made in the previously cited
dictionary: A dragoman is an interpreter or guide, particularly in countries
where Arabic, Turkish, or Persian is spoken.
Regarding
16th, 17th, and 18th-century France, alongside the use of the term
"dragoman" in most European languages, the term
"truchement" (or "trucheman") was commonly employed in
France. This was either as a positive equivalent of the Arabic word
"tarjumān" [30], or as a pejorative term used by Blaise Pascal to
denote a "weak interpreter" or a "treacherous interpreter."
[31] The derogatory connotation of the term "truchement” characterised
simultaneous translation and underscored the immediacy of the process,
suggesting that the "truchement" was a deficient interpreter due to
the spontaneous nature of his rendition. In terms of written translation, a
poor translator was given a distinct name to differentiate him, as noted in
Émile Littré's dictionary: "translateur."
However,
beyond positive and negative labels, the term "truchement" or
"trucheman" firstly referred to a mediator in general, and secondly,
to the person or employee responsible for verbally translating conversations
between two individuals speaking different languages. The term
"truchement" or "trucheman" was also used figuratively to
denote the human ability to convey feelings and images through speech.
In
the mid-20th century, after World War II and during the Nuremberg trials, a
pressing need arose for specialised, professional simultaneous interpreters to
facilitate communication between judges and defendants accused of war crimes.
This demand also prompted a distinction between this category of translators
and others. Thus, the old Latin term "interpres" was revisited and
adapted with symbolic regional variations: "interprète" in French and
“interpreter” in English for simultaneous translation, versus "traducteur"
in French and "translator" in English for written translation.
8. Conclusion
In
summary, translation in the English context differs from that in French.
Translating into English involves substituting one word for another and
reorganising phrases accordingly. This process requires, above all, two
essential skills. The first is identifying what is necessary in the source
material and what is peripheral, likely to be marginalised or overlooked during
translation. The second skill is translating only the interchangeable and
replaceable linguistic elements or content. That is, only the solid parts of
the source text, which can be understood and resonated with in earthly
languages, are translated. Anything beyond that, such as rhetorical
enhancements and verbal embellishments, may be lost in translation.[32]
Therefore, the English term "translation" assumes the existence of
items and the presence of content stripped of their original linguistic form,
waiting to be exchanged for new words and clothed in a new linguistic guise.
The
French and Anglo-Saxon perspectives on translation differ from the moment the
term denoting translation is introduced (“to translate" or
"traduire"), resulting in different translation outcomes. The French
word "traduction" is inherently more freeing, as it highlights the
process of translation, which is fundamentally transformative and mutable in
nature, like all nouns ending in -duction. Consequently, it is not surprising
that French culture developed one of the most liberated models of translation
in Western history: Les Belles Infidèles (or The Beautiful Unfaithful).
Thus,
while English sees translation as an exchange of meanings that overlooks both
the familiar and the foreign, French views the act of translation as an
opportunity to domesticate the foreign. As a result, an Anglophone and a
Francophone find it difficult to understand the same concept of translation,
nor do they approach translation in the same way. This conceptual difference is
deeply embedded and implicit in the distinct terms for the act of translation
itself: "traduire" in French and "to translate" in English.
It is
evident from the above that coining a term to define the act of translation
varies not only in linguistic expression across languages but also in its
underlying philosophy and practice. Therefore, it becomes challenging to equate
the English term "to translate" with the French term
"traduire", as they do not serve the same function, nor do they lead
to the same goal. The latter, "traduire", is transformative, aiming
to create a (very) free translation, while the former, "to
translate", is more focused on content because its horizon is preplanned
to produce a "literal translation."[33]
These
two models have evolved to represent the two poles of translation theory from
the 19th century through the 20th century and into the 21st century, adopting
various names, including quantitative translation, qualitative translation,
literal translation, free translation, as well as linguistic and literary
translation, among others. Despite how confusing the terminology may sound, the
core remains the same. The French and English terms, "to translate"
and "traduire," serve as the fundamental origins that have
established, shaped, and framed translation philosophy from the European
Renaissance to the present day, at both levels of performance (comprehension
and rendition), from both perspectives (source-text orientation and target-text
orientation), in both fields (theory and practice), and across both eras (past
and present).
References
[1] Berman, Antoine: "De la translation à la traduction". TTR:
traduction, terminologie, rédaction, vol.1, n°1, 1988. p. 28.
[2]
Berman. "De la translation à la traduction". p.28.
[3]
Lohmann,
J.: Philosophie unci Sprachwissentschaft. (Berlin: Dunker und Humblot,
1965). Page 85. Cited in Antoine Berman. Ibid. p. 29.
[4]
Berman. "De la translation à la traduction". p. 29.
[5]
Berman. "De la translation à la traduction". p. 29.
[6]
Simon,
Sherry: "Conflits de juridiction" In Meta. Montréal. Cited in
Antoine Berman: "De la translation à
la traduction". p. 26.
[7]
Rîpeanu,
Sandra Reinheimer: Les Emprunts latins dans les langues romanes. vol.1.
(Bucarest/Roumanie: Editura Universitâţii din Bucureşti, 2004). p. 226.
[8]
Richelet, Pierre: Dictionnaire de
la langue Françoise (ancienne et moderne). Tome Troisième (P-Z). (Lyon:
Chez les Frères Duplain, 1759). p.771.
[9] Littré, Emile:
Dictionnaire de la langue Française. Tome Quatrième (Q-Z). (Paris:
Librairie Hachette et C., 1883). p.2315.
[10]
Berman. "De
la translation à la traduction". p. 30.
[11]
Littré. Dictionnaire
de la langue Française. p. 2315.
[12] Dictionnaire de l’Académie Françoise. Première
édition. Tome second (M-Z). (Paris: Chez La veuve de Jean-Baptiste Coignard,
1696). p. 583.
[13]
Dictionnaire de l’Académie
Françoise. p. 590.
[14]
Littré. Dictionnaire
de la langue Française. p. 2294.
[15] Dictionnaire Larousse Universel. Tome 2.
1923. p. 1124.
[16] Nouveau Larousse Illustré (Dictionnaire
Universel Encyclopédique). Tome Septième. (Paris: Librairie Larousse, N.D.). p. 1083.
[17] Le nouveau Petit Robert (Dictionnaire alphabétique et analogique de la langue française). Texte
remanié et amplifié sous la direction de Josette Rey-Debove et Alain Rey. (Paris:
Dictionnaires Le Robert, 2001). pp. 2556-2557.
[18] Serres, Michel: La traduction. (Paris: éd. Minuit,
1974). p. 9.
[19]
Serres. La traduction. p. 31.
[20] A New English Dictionary
on Historical Principles (Founded Mainly on the
Materials Collected by The Philological Society). Volume X (10/20). Part I (TI-U).
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1926). p. 265.
[21] A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles. pp. 265-266.
[22] American
Heritage Dictionary.
(Boston/USA: Houghton Miflin Company, Second College Edition, 1976). p. 1288.
[23] The
Merriam-Webster Dictionary, (Springfield/Massachussetts: The Merriam-Webster
Incorporated, 2004). p. 760.
[24]
Berman. "De la translation
à la traduction". p. 32.
[25]
Berman. "De la translation
à la traduction". p. 32.
[26]
Berman. "De la translation
à la traduction". p. 33.
[27]
Berman. "De la translation
à la traduction". p. 33.
[28] Gaffiot, Félix: Dictionnaire latin français.
(Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1934). p. 844.
[29] Cary, Edmond: "Pour une théorie de la
traduction". In Journal des traducteurs/Translators' Journal, 7
(4), 1962. pp. 118–127.
[30] Seleskovitch, Danica: "L'interprète dans
les conférences internationales". La Revue des lettres modernes.
Cahiers Champollion, n° 1, 1968.
[31] Pascal, Blaise: Les Provinciales (ou
Lettres écrites par Louis de Montalte à un provincial de ses amis et aux RR.
PP. Jésuites sur le sujet de la morale et de la politique de ces Pères). 1657.
[32] Hofstadter: Godel Escher
Bach. (Paris: Interéditions, 1985).
[33]
Berman. "De la translation
à la traduction". p.
34.
International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation
